Global number of publications over time Planned maintenance scheduled April 23, 2019 at 23:30 UTC (7:30pm US/Eastern) Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara Unicorn Meta Zoo #1: Why another podcast?Why are some PhD holders unable to become professors?Which kinds of academic revolutions has philosophy of science indentified so far and when?Finding number of publications in a subjectTuition cost over timeStudies over how noisy is it to accept/reject submissionsA new model for publications where papers evolve over time?Are there studies testing whether academia rewards researchers based on number of publications?Why do journals have limits on the number of references?Trends on time spent studying over the the past few decades, for students outside the USIEEE journal or conference total number of publications?Publications for small time researchNumber of Papers published in area of work
.bashrc alias for a command with fixed second parameter
"Destructive power" carried by a B-52?
How much damage would a cupful of neutron star matter do to the Earth?
Why is a lens darker than other ones when applying the same settings?
Is this Kuo-toa homebrew race balanced?
How do Java 8 default methods hеlp with lambdas?
Is there any significance to the prison numbers of the Beagle Boys starting with 176-?
By what mechanism was the 2017 General Election called?
How will be cipher selected when Client is running on version TLS 1.3 and server is running on TLS 1.2?
Vertical ranges of Column Plots in 12
Can haste grant me and my beast master companion extra attacks?
My mentor says to set image to Fine instead of RAW — how is this different from JPG?
Weaponising the Grasp-at-a-Distance spell
Fit odd number of triplets in a measure?
Did pre-Columbian Americans know the spherical shape of the Earth?
First paper to introduce the "principal-agent problem"
Twin's vs. Twins'
Are there any irrational/transcendental numbers for which the distribution of decimal digits is not uniform?
Should a wizard buy fine inks every time he want to copy spells into his spellbook?
Random body shuffle every night—can we still function?
New Order #6: Easter Egg
Marquee sign letters
Is it OK to use the testing sample to compare algorithms?
Does the universe have a fixed centre of mass?
Global number of publications over time
Planned maintenance scheduled April 23, 2019 at 23:30 UTC (7:30pm US/Eastern)
Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara
Unicorn Meta Zoo #1: Why another podcast?Why are some PhD holders unable to become professors?Which kinds of academic revolutions has philosophy of science indentified so far and when?Finding number of publications in a subjectTuition cost over timeStudies over how noisy is it to accept/reject submissionsA new model for publications where papers evolve over time?Are there studies testing whether academia rewards researchers based on number of publications?Why do journals have limits on the number of references?Trends on time spent studying over the the past few decades, for students outside the USIEEE journal or conference total number of publications?Publications for small time researchNumber of Papers published in area of work
We always hear about the increasing number of publications published every year and the resulting information overload in science. I wanted to show this trend to students to highlight why they should care about information literacy and search strategies. Unfortunately, I couldn't find a reliable source that highlights this trend, e.g. in an easy understandable figure.
I searched for publications including this information and even hoped for Web of Science or Google Scholar to publish this information but couldn't find anything useful. It is not that important what kinds of publication types are included, e.g. only journal articles or all kinds of publications.
Has anyone a reliable and relatively easy to understand source highlighting the trend of increasing global number of publications over time?
publications reference-request
add a comment |
We always hear about the increasing number of publications published every year and the resulting information overload in science. I wanted to show this trend to students to highlight why they should care about information literacy and search strategies. Unfortunately, I couldn't find a reliable source that highlights this trend, e.g. in an easy understandable figure.
I searched for publications including this information and even hoped for Web of Science or Google Scholar to publish this information but couldn't find anything useful. It is not that important what kinds of publication types are included, e.g. only journal articles or all kinds of publications.
Has anyone a reliable and relatively easy to understand source highlighting the trend of increasing global number of publications over time?
publications reference-request
Is that trend the same as the increase in degrees given out compared to 30, 40 or 50 years ago?
– Solar Mike
Mar 24 at 15:52
The underlying reasons may be related.
– FuzzyLeapfrog
Mar 24 at 16:01
Microsoft's Academic search team presented such a chart at the 2016 Microsoft Academic Summit in New York. My recollection is that the overall trend was about 7 percent per year growth in citations, going back to the nineteenth century. The trend was steady, with three exceptions: Major drops during the World Wars, and lack of growth during the Great Depression. If anything, the growth rate was higher in recent decades. I helped prepare the results, but I do not have a copy.
– Jasper
Mar 24 at 23:15
add a comment |
We always hear about the increasing number of publications published every year and the resulting information overload in science. I wanted to show this trend to students to highlight why they should care about information literacy and search strategies. Unfortunately, I couldn't find a reliable source that highlights this trend, e.g. in an easy understandable figure.
I searched for publications including this information and even hoped for Web of Science or Google Scholar to publish this information but couldn't find anything useful. It is not that important what kinds of publication types are included, e.g. only journal articles or all kinds of publications.
Has anyone a reliable and relatively easy to understand source highlighting the trend of increasing global number of publications over time?
publications reference-request
We always hear about the increasing number of publications published every year and the resulting information overload in science. I wanted to show this trend to students to highlight why they should care about information literacy and search strategies. Unfortunately, I couldn't find a reliable source that highlights this trend, e.g. in an easy understandable figure.
I searched for publications including this information and even hoped for Web of Science or Google Scholar to publish this information but couldn't find anything useful. It is not that important what kinds of publication types are included, e.g. only journal articles or all kinds of publications.
Has anyone a reliable and relatively easy to understand source highlighting the trend of increasing global number of publications over time?
publications reference-request
publications reference-request
edited Mar 26 at 3:14
JJJ
1605
1605
asked Mar 24 at 15:36
FuzzyLeapfrogFuzzyLeapfrog
4,05811241
4,05811241
Is that trend the same as the increase in degrees given out compared to 30, 40 or 50 years ago?
– Solar Mike
Mar 24 at 15:52
The underlying reasons may be related.
– FuzzyLeapfrog
Mar 24 at 16:01
Microsoft's Academic search team presented such a chart at the 2016 Microsoft Academic Summit in New York. My recollection is that the overall trend was about 7 percent per year growth in citations, going back to the nineteenth century. The trend was steady, with three exceptions: Major drops during the World Wars, and lack of growth during the Great Depression. If anything, the growth rate was higher in recent decades. I helped prepare the results, but I do not have a copy.
– Jasper
Mar 24 at 23:15
add a comment |
Is that trend the same as the increase in degrees given out compared to 30, 40 or 50 years ago?
– Solar Mike
Mar 24 at 15:52
The underlying reasons may be related.
– FuzzyLeapfrog
Mar 24 at 16:01
Microsoft's Academic search team presented such a chart at the 2016 Microsoft Academic Summit in New York. My recollection is that the overall trend was about 7 percent per year growth in citations, going back to the nineteenth century. The trend was steady, with three exceptions: Major drops during the World Wars, and lack of growth during the Great Depression. If anything, the growth rate was higher in recent decades. I helped prepare the results, but I do not have a copy.
– Jasper
Mar 24 at 23:15
Is that trend the same as the increase in degrees given out compared to 30, 40 or 50 years ago?
– Solar Mike
Mar 24 at 15:52
Is that trend the same as the increase in degrees given out compared to 30, 40 or 50 years ago?
– Solar Mike
Mar 24 at 15:52
The underlying reasons may be related.
– FuzzyLeapfrog
Mar 24 at 16:01
The underlying reasons may be related.
– FuzzyLeapfrog
Mar 24 at 16:01
Microsoft's Academic search team presented such a chart at the 2016 Microsoft Academic Summit in New York. My recollection is that the overall trend was about 7 percent per year growth in citations, going back to the nineteenth century. The trend was steady, with three exceptions: Major drops during the World Wars, and lack of growth during the Great Depression. If anything, the growth rate was higher in recent decades. I helped prepare the results, but I do not have a copy.
– Jasper
Mar 24 at 23:15
Microsoft's Academic search team presented such a chart at the 2016 Microsoft Academic Summit in New York. My recollection is that the overall trend was about 7 percent per year growth in citations, going back to the nineteenth century. The trend was steady, with three exceptions: Major drops during the World Wars, and lack of growth during the Great Depression. If anything, the growth rate was higher in recent decades. I helped prepare the results, but I do not have a copy.
– Jasper
Mar 24 at 23:15
add a comment |
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
I found an archived version of the 2018 MTS Report. Among other statistics, it has this plot of the scientific output from 1975-2018 and four different databases:
The Web of Science (WoS) line looks rather similar to the earlier results of Bornmann and Mutz (2014), who produced this figure for 1980-2012 using a copy of WoS' database:
Thank you, this is a good starting point. Yes, it would be great to have more up-to-date numbers. According to this blogpost we already hit the 2.5 million publications per year in 2015 but the cited STM report from 2015 is no longer available online. Could be up to 3 million per year now ...
– FuzzyLeapfrog
Mar 24 at 15:59
@FuzzyLeapfrog I couldn't access the STM reports (2015 or 2018) either. There's a NSF report reporting 2,290,294 publications for 2014 though.
– Anyon
Mar 24 at 16:06
I'll include this figure in my lecture slides untill I'll stumble over a more up-to-date source. Maybe the STM documents will be availble again sometime.
– FuzzyLeapfrog
Mar 24 at 16:22
1
Nice answer. The figures are less impressive when related to population growth (although I'm not sure how relevant this is, given that most population growth happens in the poor countries that don't produce much research).
– henning
Mar 24 at 17:54
Webarchive is the best. Thank you for the update!
– FuzzyLeapfrog
Mar 24 at 19:16
add a comment |
arxiv.org presents his own statistics, but be aware that a lot of publications from humanities and biomedical sciences are missing in this statistics:
This chart also shows the exponential trend on arxiv.
Long-term chart:
Very long-term chart:
There is also biorxiv covering the missing biomedical scientific branches, much younger than arxiv but there is a quite detailed statistical report on its growth.
Publication: Attention decay in science (due to exponential growth)
(To me it's also interesting how this correlates with the number of PhD students in another answer and how this can be explained... did internet boost scientific productivity and/or number of PhD students?!)
8
Note that arXiv has progressively expanded its scope, so the growth in the linked chart will partly reflect that, as well as changing attitudes to preprints in some subfields.
– Anyon
Mar 24 at 18:49
@Anyon thanks, I added biorxiv, was not aware of this clone for biomedical sciences
– user847982
Mar 24 at 18:58
That's not exponential growth, though...
– nabla
Mar 24 at 19:11
@nabla the "attention decay in science" paper has some exponential fits in it and the long-term charts show the trend better
– user847982
Mar 24 at 19:16
Sure, but the curves shown before the edit were not examples of exponential growth.
– nabla
Mar 24 at 20:23
|
show 4 more comments
For the field of mathematics, another source of data is the AMS Math Reviews (MathSciNet), where this type of information is readily available (just search for the year you want). Virtually every reputable math publication gets indexed there nowadays. Also, unlike something like Google Scholar, only reputable journals get indexed and each publication appears only once. Math Reviews is a paid service, so you'd need to be affiliated with a university with a subscription. (I don't know how complete this data is as you go further back in time. Maybe someone else has a better sense of this.)
For example, here are the total number of mathematics publications for various years at 10-year intervals.
2018: 111,018;
2008: 99,268;
1998: 67,807;
1988: 55,420;
1978: 36,637;
1968: 19,615;
1958: 10,249;
1948: 5,456;
1938: 1,417;
1928: 1,439;
1918: 632;
1908: 729;
1898: 710;
1888: 266;
1878: 181
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "415"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2facademia.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f126980%2fglobal-number-of-publications-over-time%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
I found an archived version of the 2018 MTS Report. Among other statistics, it has this plot of the scientific output from 1975-2018 and four different databases:
The Web of Science (WoS) line looks rather similar to the earlier results of Bornmann and Mutz (2014), who produced this figure for 1980-2012 using a copy of WoS' database:
Thank you, this is a good starting point. Yes, it would be great to have more up-to-date numbers. According to this blogpost we already hit the 2.5 million publications per year in 2015 but the cited STM report from 2015 is no longer available online. Could be up to 3 million per year now ...
– FuzzyLeapfrog
Mar 24 at 15:59
@FuzzyLeapfrog I couldn't access the STM reports (2015 or 2018) either. There's a NSF report reporting 2,290,294 publications for 2014 though.
– Anyon
Mar 24 at 16:06
I'll include this figure in my lecture slides untill I'll stumble over a more up-to-date source. Maybe the STM documents will be availble again sometime.
– FuzzyLeapfrog
Mar 24 at 16:22
1
Nice answer. The figures are less impressive when related to population growth (although I'm not sure how relevant this is, given that most population growth happens in the poor countries that don't produce much research).
– henning
Mar 24 at 17:54
Webarchive is the best. Thank you for the update!
– FuzzyLeapfrog
Mar 24 at 19:16
add a comment |
I found an archived version of the 2018 MTS Report. Among other statistics, it has this plot of the scientific output from 1975-2018 and four different databases:
The Web of Science (WoS) line looks rather similar to the earlier results of Bornmann and Mutz (2014), who produced this figure for 1980-2012 using a copy of WoS' database:
Thank you, this is a good starting point. Yes, it would be great to have more up-to-date numbers. According to this blogpost we already hit the 2.5 million publications per year in 2015 but the cited STM report from 2015 is no longer available online. Could be up to 3 million per year now ...
– FuzzyLeapfrog
Mar 24 at 15:59
@FuzzyLeapfrog I couldn't access the STM reports (2015 or 2018) either. There's a NSF report reporting 2,290,294 publications for 2014 though.
– Anyon
Mar 24 at 16:06
I'll include this figure in my lecture slides untill I'll stumble over a more up-to-date source. Maybe the STM documents will be availble again sometime.
– FuzzyLeapfrog
Mar 24 at 16:22
1
Nice answer. The figures are less impressive when related to population growth (although I'm not sure how relevant this is, given that most population growth happens in the poor countries that don't produce much research).
– henning
Mar 24 at 17:54
Webarchive is the best. Thank you for the update!
– FuzzyLeapfrog
Mar 24 at 19:16
add a comment |
I found an archived version of the 2018 MTS Report. Among other statistics, it has this plot of the scientific output from 1975-2018 and four different databases:
The Web of Science (WoS) line looks rather similar to the earlier results of Bornmann and Mutz (2014), who produced this figure for 1980-2012 using a copy of WoS' database:
I found an archived version of the 2018 MTS Report. Among other statistics, it has this plot of the scientific output from 1975-2018 and four different databases:
The Web of Science (WoS) line looks rather similar to the earlier results of Bornmann and Mutz (2014), who produced this figure for 1980-2012 using a copy of WoS' database:
edited Mar 24 at 19:14
answered Mar 24 at 15:53
AnyonAnyon
8,76023345
8,76023345
Thank you, this is a good starting point. Yes, it would be great to have more up-to-date numbers. According to this blogpost we already hit the 2.5 million publications per year in 2015 but the cited STM report from 2015 is no longer available online. Could be up to 3 million per year now ...
– FuzzyLeapfrog
Mar 24 at 15:59
@FuzzyLeapfrog I couldn't access the STM reports (2015 or 2018) either. There's a NSF report reporting 2,290,294 publications for 2014 though.
– Anyon
Mar 24 at 16:06
I'll include this figure in my lecture slides untill I'll stumble over a more up-to-date source. Maybe the STM documents will be availble again sometime.
– FuzzyLeapfrog
Mar 24 at 16:22
1
Nice answer. The figures are less impressive when related to population growth (although I'm not sure how relevant this is, given that most population growth happens in the poor countries that don't produce much research).
– henning
Mar 24 at 17:54
Webarchive is the best. Thank you for the update!
– FuzzyLeapfrog
Mar 24 at 19:16
add a comment |
Thank you, this is a good starting point. Yes, it would be great to have more up-to-date numbers. According to this blogpost we already hit the 2.5 million publications per year in 2015 but the cited STM report from 2015 is no longer available online. Could be up to 3 million per year now ...
– FuzzyLeapfrog
Mar 24 at 15:59
@FuzzyLeapfrog I couldn't access the STM reports (2015 or 2018) either. There's a NSF report reporting 2,290,294 publications for 2014 though.
– Anyon
Mar 24 at 16:06
I'll include this figure in my lecture slides untill I'll stumble over a more up-to-date source. Maybe the STM documents will be availble again sometime.
– FuzzyLeapfrog
Mar 24 at 16:22
1
Nice answer. The figures are less impressive when related to population growth (although I'm not sure how relevant this is, given that most population growth happens in the poor countries that don't produce much research).
– henning
Mar 24 at 17:54
Webarchive is the best. Thank you for the update!
– FuzzyLeapfrog
Mar 24 at 19:16
Thank you, this is a good starting point. Yes, it would be great to have more up-to-date numbers. According to this blogpost we already hit the 2.5 million publications per year in 2015 but the cited STM report from 2015 is no longer available online. Could be up to 3 million per year now ...
– FuzzyLeapfrog
Mar 24 at 15:59
Thank you, this is a good starting point. Yes, it would be great to have more up-to-date numbers. According to this blogpost we already hit the 2.5 million publications per year in 2015 but the cited STM report from 2015 is no longer available online. Could be up to 3 million per year now ...
– FuzzyLeapfrog
Mar 24 at 15:59
@FuzzyLeapfrog I couldn't access the STM reports (2015 or 2018) either. There's a NSF report reporting 2,290,294 publications for 2014 though.
– Anyon
Mar 24 at 16:06
@FuzzyLeapfrog I couldn't access the STM reports (2015 or 2018) either. There's a NSF report reporting 2,290,294 publications for 2014 though.
– Anyon
Mar 24 at 16:06
I'll include this figure in my lecture slides untill I'll stumble over a more up-to-date source. Maybe the STM documents will be availble again sometime.
– FuzzyLeapfrog
Mar 24 at 16:22
I'll include this figure in my lecture slides untill I'll stumble over a more up-to-date source. Maybe the STM documents will be availble again sometime.
– FuzzyLeapfrog
Mar 24 at 16:22
1
1
Nice answer. The figures are less impressive when related to population growth (although I'm not sure how relevant this is, given that most population growth happens in the poor countries that don't produce much research).
– henning
Mar 24 at 17:54
Nice answer. The figures are less impressive when related to population growth (although I'm not sure how relevant this is, given that most population growth happens in the poor countries that don't produce much research).
– henning
Mar 24 at 17:54
Webarchive is the best. Thank you for the update!
– FuzzyLeapfrog
Mar 24 at 19:16
Webarchive is the best. Thank you for the update!
– FuzzyLeapfrog
Mar 24 at 19:16
add a comment |
arxiv.org presents his own statistics, but be aware that a lot of publications from humanities and biomedical sciences are missing in this statistics:
This chart also shows the exponential trend on arxiv.
Long-term chart:
Very long-term chart:
There is also biorxiv covering the missing biomedical scientific branches, much younger than arxiv but there is a quite detailed statistical report on its growth.
Publication: Attention decay in science (due to exponential growth)
(To me it's also interesting how this correlates with the number of PhD students in another answer and how this can be explained... did internet boost scientific productivity and/or number of PhD students?!)
8
Note that arXiv has progressively expanded its scope, so the growth in the linked chart will partly reflect that, as well as changing attitudes to preprints in some subfields.
– Anyon
Mar 24 at 18:49
@Anyon thanks, I added biorxiv, was not aware of this clone for biomedical sciences
– user847982
Mar 24 at 18:58
That's not exponential growth, though...
– nabla
Mar 24 at 19:11
@nabla the "attention decay in science" paper has some exponential fits in it and the long-term charts show the trend better
– user847982
Mar 24 at 19:16
Sure, but the curves shown before the edit were not examples of exponential growth.
– nabla
Mar 24 at 20:23
|
show 4 more comments
arxiv.org presents his own statistics, but be aware that a lot of publications from humanities and biomedical sciences are missing in this statistics:
This chart also shows the exponential trend on arxiv.
Long-term chart:
Very long-term chart:
There is also biorxiv covering the missing biomedical scientific branches, much younger than arxiv but there is a quite detailed statistical report on its growth.
Publication: Attention decay in science (due to exponential growth)
(To me it's also interesting how this correlates with the number of PhD students in another answer and how this can be explained... did internet boost scientific productivity and/or number of PhD students?!)
8
Note that arXiv has progressively expanded its scope, so the growth in the linked chart will partly reflect that, as well as changing attitudes to preprints in some subfields.
– Anyon
Mar 24 at 18:49
@Anyon thanks, I added biorxiv, was not aware of this clone for biomedical sciences
– user847982
Mar 24 at 18:58
That's not exponential growth, though...
– nabla
Mar 24 at 19:11
@nabla the "attention decay in science" paper has some exponential fits in it and the long-term charts show the trend better
– user847982
Mar 24 at 19:16
Sure, but the curves shown before the edit were not examples of exponential growth.
– nabla
Mar 24 at 20:23
|
show 4 more comments
arxiv.org presents his own statistics, but be aware that a lot of publications from humanities and biomedical sciences are missing in this statistics:
This chart also shows the exponential trend on arxiv.
Long-term chart:
Very long-term chart:
There is also biorxiv covering the missing biomedical scientific branches, much younger than arxiv but there is a quite detailed statistical report on its growth.
Publication: Attention decay in science (due to exponential growth)
(To me it's also interesting how this correlates with the number of PhD students in another answer and how this can be explained... did internet boost scientific productivity and/or number of PhD students?!)
arxiv.org presents his own statistics, but be aware that a lot of publications from humanities and biomedical sciences are missing in this statistics:
This chart also shows the exponential trend on arxiv.
Long-term chart:
Very long-term chart:
There is also biorxiv covering the missing biomedical scientific branches, much younger than arxiv but there is a quite detailed statistical report on its growth.
Publication: Attention decay in science (due to exponential growth)
(To me it's also interesting how this correlates with the number of PhD students in another answer and how this can be explained... did internet boost scientific productivity and/or number of PhD students?!)
edited Mar 24 at 19:15
answered Mar 24 at 18:46
user847982user847982
1,165412
1,165412
8
Note that arXiv has progressively expanded its scope, so the growth in the linked chart will partly reflect that, as well as changing attitudes to preprints in some subfields.
– Anyon
Mar 24 at 18:49
@Anyon thanks, I added biorxiv, was not aware of this clone for biomedical sciences
– user847982
Mar 24 at 18:58
That's not exponential growth, though...
– nabla
Mar 24 at 19:11
@nabla the "attention decay in science" paper has some exponential fits in it and the long-term charts show the trend better
– user847982
Mar 24 at 19:16
Sure, but the curves shown before the edit were not examples of exponential growth.
– nabla
Mar 24 at 20:23
|
show 4 more comments
8
Note that arXiv has progressively expanded its scope, so the growth in the linked chart will partly reflect that, as well as changing attitudes to preprints in some subfields.
– Anyon
Mar 24 at 18:49
@Anyon thanks, I added biorxiv, was not aware of this clone for biomedical sciences
– user847982
Mar 24 at 18:58
That's not exponential growth, though...
– nabla
Mar 24 at 19:11
@nabla the "attention decay in science" paper has some exponential fits in it and the long-term charts show the trend better
– user847982
Mar 24 at 19:16
Sure, but the curves shown before the edit were not examples of exponential growth.
– nabla
Mar 24 at 20:23
8
8
Note that arXiv has progressively expanded its scope, so the growth in the linked chart will partly reflect that, as well as changing attitudes to preprints in some subfields.
– Anyon
Mar 24 at 18:49
Note that arXiv has progressively expanded its scope, so the growth in the linked chart will partly reflect that, as well as changing attitudes to preprints in some subfields.
– Anyon
Mar 24 at 18:49
@Anyon thanks, I added biorxiv, was not aware of this clone for biomedical sciences
– user847982
Mar 24 at 18:58
@Anyon thanks, I added biorxiv, was not aware of this clone for biomedical sciences
– user847982
Mar 24 at 18:58
That's not exponential growth, though...
– nabla
Mar 24 at 19:11
That's not exponential growth, though...
– nabla
Mar 24 at 19:11
@nabla the "attention decay in science" paper has some exponential fits in it and the long-term charts show the trend better
– user847982
Mar 24 at 19:16
@nabla the "attention decay in science" paper has some exponential fits in it and the long-term charts show the trend better
– user847982
Mar 24 at 19:16
Sure, but the curves shown before the edit were not examples of exponential growth.
– nabla
Mar 24 at 20:23
Sure, but the curves shown before the edit were not examples of exponential growth.
– nabla
Mar 24 at 20:23
|
show 4 more comments
For the field of mathematics, another source of data is the AMS Math Reviews (MathSciNet), where this type of information is readily available (just search for the year you want). Virtually every reputable math publication gets indexed there nowadays. Also, unlike something like Google Scholar, only reputable journals get indexed and each publication appears only once. Math Reviews is a paid service, so you'd need to be affiliated with a university with a subscription. (I don't know how complete this data is as you go further back in time. Maybe someone else has a better sense of this.)
For example, here are the total number of mathematics publications for various years at 10-year intervals.
2018: 111,018;
2008: 99,268;
1998: 67,807;
1988: 55,420;
1978: 36,637;
1968: 19,615;
1958: 10,249;
1948: 5,456;
1938: 1,417;
1928: 1,439;
1918: 632;
1908: 729;
1898: 710;
1888: 266;
1878: 181
add a comment |
For the field of mathematics, another source of data is the AMS Math Reviews (MathSciNet), where this type of information is readily available (just search for the year you want). Virtually every reputable math publication gets indexed there nowadays. Also, unlike something like Google Scholar, only reputable journals get indexed and each publication appears only once. Math Reviews is a paid service, so you'd need to be affiliated with a university with a subscription. (I don't know how complete this data is as you go further back in time. Maybe someone else has a better sense of this.)
For example, here are the total number of mathematics publications for various years at 10-year intervals.
2018: 111,018;
2008: 99,268;
1998: 67,807;
1988: 55,420;
1978: 36,637;
1968: 19,615;
1958: 10,249;
1948: 5,456;
1938: 1,417;
1928: 1,439;
1918: 632;
1908: 729;
1898: 710;
1888: 266;
1878: 181
add a comment |
For the field of mathematics, another source of data is the AMS Math Reviews (MathSciNet), where this type of information is readily available (just search for the year you want). Virtually every reputable math publication gets indexed there nowadays. Also, unlike something like Google Scholar, only reputable journals get indexed and each publication appears only once. Math Reviews is a paid service, so you'd need to be affiliated with a university with a subscription. (I don't know how complete this data is as you go further back in time. Maybe someone else has a better sense of this.)
For example, here are the total number of mathematics publications for various years at 10-year intervals.
2018: 111,018;
2008: 99,268;
1998: 67,807;
1988: 55,420;
1978: 36,637;
1968: 19,615;
1958: 10,249;
1948: 5,456;
1938: 1,417;
1928: 1,439;
1918: 632;
1908: 729;
1898: 710;
1888: 266;
1878: 181
For the field of mathematics, another source of data is the AMS Math Reviews (MathSciNet), where this type of information is readily available (just search for the year you want). Virtually every reputable math publication gets indexed there nowadays. Also, unlike something like Google Scholar, only reputable journals get indexed and each publication appears only once. Math Reviews is a paid service, so you'd need to be affiliated with a university with a subscription. (I don't know how complete this data is as you go further back in time. Maybe someone else has a better sense of this.)
For example, here are the total number of mathematics publications for various years at 10-year intervals.
2018: 111,018;
2008: 99,268;
1998: 67,807;
1988: 55,420;
1978: 36,637;
1968: 19,615;
1958: 10,249;
1948: 5,456;
1938: 1,417;
1928: 1,439;
1918: 632;
1908: 729;
1898: 710;
1888: 266;
1878: 181
answered Mar 24 at 23:25
mdrmdr
1263
1263
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Academia Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2facademia.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f126980%2fglobal-number-of-publications-over-time%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Is that trend the same as the increase in degrees given out compared to 30, 40 or 50 years ago?
– Solar Mike
Mar 24 at 15:52
The underlying reasons may be related.
– FuzzyLeapfrog
Mar 24 at 16:01
Microsoft's Academic search team presented such a chart at the 2016 Microsoft Academic Summit in New York. My recollection is that the overall trend was about 7 percent per year growth in citations, going back to the nineteenth century. The trend was steady, with three exceptions: Major drops during the World Wars, and lack of growth during the Great Depression. If anything, the growth rate was higher in recent decades. I helped prepare the results, but I do not have a copy.
– Jasper
Mar 24 at 23:15