300,000 reports inNature during the 1869–1998 period have been reviewed. The distribution of articles by subfields was determined. Additional sources of information were several journals on analytical chemistry and papers at the Pittsburg conference series during 1950–1999. The methodology used is based on the analysis of the average age of employed instruments. The agreement between scientometric data from various sources of information depends on the development stage of the field of science. Calculated and measured scientometric curves were compared. One of the key trends in the development of basic sciences, namely, the increase of articles dealing with instrumental analytical chemistry, inNature is revealed.
Scan Tunneling Microscope Average Annual Number Nature Nature SCIENTOMETRIC Analysis British Science
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.
V. G. Berezkin, E. N. Viktorova, Development of capillary gas chromatography (Scientometric analysis),J. Anal. Chem., 43 (1988) 2099–2102.Google Scholar
D. B. Arkhipov, B. G. Belenkii, Development of liquid chromatography instrumentation. Trends in 1958–1991,J. Anal. Chem., 48 (1993) 1894–1905.Google Scholar
D. B. Arkhipov, B. G. Belenkii, Trends in the development of liquid chromatography instrumentation based on citations in two scientific journals,LC-GC Inter., 6 (1993) 370–376.Google Scholar
D. B. Arkhipov, B. G. Belenkii, Analysis of trends in the development of instrumental separation techniques: 1952–1993,J. Anal. Chem., 50 (1995) 806–817.Google Scholar
I. Prigogine,From Being to Becoming: Time and Complexity in the Physical Sciences, W. H. Freeman and Company, San Francisco, 1980, p. 235.Google Scholar
E. Bruckner, W. Ebeling, A. Sharnhorst, Application of evolution models in scientometrics,Scientometrics, 18 (1990) 21–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
T. Braun, E. Bujdosó, A. Schubert,Literature of Analytical Chemistry: A Scientometric Evalution, CRC Press, Boca Raton, 1987, p. 8.Google Scholar
A. K. Romanov, A. I. Terekhov, The mathematical modelling of the scientific personnel movement taking into account the productivity factor,Scientometrics, 33 (1995) 221–231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
L. M. Liang, H. Z. Zhao, Y. Wang, Y. S. Wu, Distribution of major scientific and technological achievements in terms of age group — Weibull distribution,Scientometrics, 36 (1996) 2–18.Google Scholar
A. K. Romanov, A. I. Terekhov, The mathematical model of productivity and age-structured scientific community evolution,Scientometrics, 39 (1997) 3–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
A. L. Rivas, D. Deshler, R. D. Colle, R. N. Gonzalez, F. W. Quimby, Indicators of disciplinary differentiation: Interdisciplinary linkages and adoption rate of biological innovations,Scientometrics, 37 (1996) 63–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar