Quantifying the ease of scientific discovery
- Samuel Arbesman
- … show all 1 hide
Rent the article at a discountRent now
* Final gross prices may vary according to local VAT.Get Access
It has long been known that scientific output proceeds on an exponential increase, or more properly, a logistic growth curve. The interplay between effort and discovery is clear, and the nature of the functional form has been thought to be due to many changes in the scientific process over time. Here I show a quantitative method for examining the ease of scientific progress, another necessary component in understanding scientific discovery. Using examples from three different scientific disciplines—mammalian species, chemical elements, and minor planets—I find the ease of discovery to conform to an exponential decay. In addition, I show how the pace of scientific discovery can be best understood as the outcome of both scientific output and ease of discovery. A quantitative study of the ease of scientific discovery in the aggregate, such as done here, has the potential to provide a great deal of insight into both the nature of future discoveries and the technical processes behind discoveries in science.
- Badash, L (1972) The completeness of nineteenth-century science. Isis 63: pp. 48-58 CrossRef
- Bettencourt, LMA, Kaiser, DI, Kaur, J, Castillo-Chávez, C, Wojick, DE (2008) Population modeling of the emergence and development of scientific fields. Scientometrics 75: pp. 495-518 CrossRef
- Carney, JA (1996) The glandulae parathyroideae of Ivar Sandström: Contributions from two continents. The American Journal of Surgical Pathology 20: pp. 1123-1144 CrossRef
- Chesley, SR, Chodas, PW, Milani, A, Valsecchi, GB, Yeomans, DK (2002) Quantifying the risk posed by potential earth impacts. Icarus 159: pp. 423-432 CrossRef
- Ekers, R. (1998). SETI and the one square kilometre radio telescope. Acta Astronautica, 42, 589–591.
- Gagnon, S. (2009). Who discovered the elements. Newport News: Thomas Jefferson National Accelerator Facility.
- Livingston, MS, Blewett, JP (1962) Particle accelerators. McGraw Hill, New York
- Minor Planet Center. (2009). Minor Planet Center Orbit Database. Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory.
- Pine, RH (1994) New mammals not so seldom. Nature 368: pp. 593 CrossRef
- Price, D. J. de Solla. (1951). Quantitative measures of the development of science. Archives Internationales d’Histoire des Sciences, 4, 85–93.
- Price, D. J. de Solla. (1986). Little science, big science and beyond. New York: Columbia University Press.
- Reeder, D. M., Helgen K. M., & Wilson, D. E. (2007) Global trends and biases in new mammal species discoveries. Occasional Papers of the Museum of Texas Tech University, 269, 1–35.
- Smith, F. A., Lyons, S. K., Ernest, S. K. M., Jones, K. E., Kaufman, D. M., Dayan, et al. (2003). Body mass of late quaternary mammals. Ecology, 84, 3403.
- Wieser, ME, Berglund, M (2009) Atomic weights of the elements 2007 (IUPAC technical report). Pure and Applied Chemistry 81: pp. 2131-2156 CrossRef
- Wilson, DE, Reeder, DM (2005) Mammal species of the world. A taxonomic and geographic reference. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore
- Quantifying the ease of scientific discovery
Volume 86, Issue 2 , pp 245-250
- Cover Date
- Print ISSN
- Online ISSN
- Springer Netherlands
- Additional Links
- Minor planets
- Industry Sectors
- Samuel Arbesman (1) (2)
- Author Affiliations
- 1. Department of Health Care Policy, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
- 2. Institute for Quantitative Social Science, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA, USA