The DOI matches its Crossref record; 8 of the 8 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Quantifying Long-Term Scientific Impact
Abstract
Citation Grabbers: Is there quantifiable regularity and predictability in citation patterns? It is clear that papers that have been cited frequently tend to accumulate more citations. It is also clear that, with time, even the most novel paper loses its currency. Some papers, however, seem to have an inherent “fitness” that can be interpreted as a community's response to the research.Wang et al.(p.127; see the Perspective byEvans) developed a mechanistic model to predict citation history. The model links a paper's ultimate impact, represented by the total number of citations the paper will ever receive, to a single measurable parameter inferred from its early citation history. The model was used to identify factors that influence a journal's impact factor.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The cited source doesn’t support the claim as written.
In the citing paper
“we constructed a negative binomial regression to predict the cumulative number of citations a paper received within the first five years after publication, which is known to be highly representative of the eventual citation count (Wang et al., 2013;Stern, 2014).”
From Measuring the Evolution of a Scientific Field through Citation Frames (2018) · cites this paper as Wang et al., 2013
Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Emergence of Scaling in Random Networks
Barabási, A.-L., & Albert, R. (1999) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.286.5439.509 · Cited by 36,135
Statistical physics of social dynamics
Castellano, C., Fortunato, S., & Loreto, V. (2009) · Reviews of Modern Physics · doi:10.1103/revmodphys.81.591 · Cited by 4,119
Gompertz, B. (1825) · Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London · doi:10.1098/rstl.1825.0026 · Cited by 3,816
Barabási, A.-L., & Bonabeau, E. (2003) · Scientific American · doi:10.1038/scientificamerican0503-60 · Cited by 2,494
Self-citationWhy the impact factor of journals should not be used for evaluating research
Seglen, P. O. (1997) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.314.7079.497 · Cited by 2,447
Dorogovtsev, S. N., & Mendes, J. F. F. (2003) · doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198515906.001.0001 · Cited by 1,563
Universality of citation distributions: Toward an objective measure of scientific impact
Radicchi, F., Fortunato, S., & Castellano, C. (2008) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.0806977105 · Cited by 828
Acuna, D. E., Allesina, S., & Kording, K. P. (2012) · Nature · doi:10.1038/489201a · Cited by 249
Research works printed but not linked: 37
- 10.1001/jama.295.1.90 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1126/science.149.3683.510 · DOI
- 10.1063/1.1996475 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1073/pnas.0507655102 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1038/4441003a · DOI
- 10.1126/science.1158357 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1126/science.1154562 · DOI
- 10.1126/science.1201765 · DOI
- 10.1038/491040a · DOI
- 10.1007/s11192-006-0144-7 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1073/pnas.0903307106 · DOI
- 10.1103/PhysRevE.80.056103 · DOI
- 10.1371/journal.pone.0001683 · DOI
- T. S. Kuhn The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (University of Chicago Press Chicago 1996). · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1073/pnas.1010757107 · DOI
- 10.1007/s100510050359 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1103/PhysRevLett.107.238701 · DOI
- 10.1209/epl/i2001-00260-6 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1103/PhysRevLett.89.258702 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.2307/1252170 · DOI
- 10.1287/mnsc.1040.0300 · DOI
- 10.1371/journal.pone.0024926 · DOI
- 10.1038/441792b · DOI
- D. J. de Solla Price Little Science Big Science... and Beyond (Columbia Univ. Press New York 1963).
- 10.1056/NEJM197804062981405 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.pneurobio.2008.09.009 · DOI
- 10.1103/PhysRevLett.109.128701 · DOI
- Boag J. W., Maximum likelihood estimates of the proportion of patients cured by cancer therapy. J. R. Stat. Soc. B 11, 15–53 (1949). · DOI
- 10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a119397 · DOI
- 10.2307/1936710 · DOI
- Williams C. B., A note on the statistical analysls of sentence-length as a criterion of literary style. Biometrika 31, 356–361 (1940).
- 10.1093/biomet/45.1-2.222 · DOI
- 10.1007/BF00202785 · DOI
- 10.1006/jmps.1995.1037 · DOI
- 10.1006/jmps.1993.1032 · DOI
- W. T. Eadie F. James Statistical Methods in Experimental Physics (World Scientific Publishing Singapore 2006).
- 10.1093/biomet/42.3-4.425 · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Fortunato, S., Bergstrom, C. T., Börner, K., Evans, J. A., Helbing, D., Milojević, S., Petersen, A. M., Radicchi, F., Sinatra, R., Uzzi, B., et al. (2018) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.aao0185 · Cited by 1,497
Self-citationPapers and patents are becoming less disruptive over time
Park, M., Leahey, E., & Funk, R. J. (2023) · Nature · doi:10.1038/s41586-022-05543-x · Cited by 899
The Matthew effect in science funding
Bol, T., de Vaan, M., & van de Rijt, A. (2018) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1719557115 · Cited by 638
Hutchins, B. I., Yuan, X., Anderson, J. M., & Santangelo, G. M. (2016) · PLoS Biology · doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.1002541 · Cited by 500
Accelerating dynamics of collective attention
Lorenz-Spreen, P., Mønsted, B. M., Hövel, P., & Lehmann, S. (2019) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/s41467-019-09311-w · Cited by 304
Artificial Intelligence in the 21st Century
Liu, J., Kong, X., Xia, F., Bai, X., Wang, L., Qing, Q., & Lee, I. (2018) · IEEE Access · doi:10.1109/access.2018.2819688 · Cited by 270
Measuring the Evolution of a Scientific Field through Citation Frames
Jurgens, D., Kumar, S., Hoover, R., McFarland, D., & Jurafsky, D. (2018) · Transactions of the Association for Computational Linguistics · doi:10.1162/tacl_a_00028 · Cited by 212
The advantage of short paper titles
Letchford, A., Moat, H. S., & Preis, T. (2015) · Royal Society Open Science · doi:10.1098/rsos.150266 · Cited by 184
Public use and public funding of science
Yin, Y., Dong, Y., Wang, K., Wang, D., & Jones, B. F. (2022) · Nature Human Behaviour · doi:10.1038/s41562-022-01397-5 · Cited by 123
Self-citationText analysis tools for identification of emerging topics and research gaps in conservation science
Westgate, M. J., Barton, P. S., Pierson, J. C., & Lindenmayer, D. B. (2015) · Conservation Biology · doi:10.1111/cobi.12605 · Cited by 123
A Century of Science: Globalization of Scientific Collaborations, Citations, and Innovations
Dong, Y., Ma, H., Shen, Z., & Wang, K. (2017) · Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining · doi:10.1145/3097983.3098016 · Cited by 89
The memory of science: Inflation, myopia, and the knowledge network
Pan, R. K., Petersen, A. M., Pammolli, F., & Fortunato, S. (2018) · Journal of Informetrics · doi:10.1016/j.joi.2018.06.005 · Cited by 79
Revisiting the Scientometric Conceptualization of Impact and Its Measurement
Abramo, G. (2018) · Journal of Informetrics · doi:10.1016/j.joi.2018.05.001 · Cited by 80
Hill, R., Yin, Y., Stein, C., Wang, X., Wang, D., & Jones, B. F. (2025) · Nature · doi:10.1038/s41586-025-09048-1 · Cited by 41
Self-citationA Quantitative Exploration on Reasons for Citing Articles from the Perspective of Cited Authors
Wang, B., Bu, Y., & Xu, Y. (2018) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-018-2787-6 · Cited by 19
Reviewing Peer Review at the NIH
Lauer, M. S., & Nakamura, R. (2015) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmp1507427 · Cited by 19
Metadata
- Authors
- Wang, D., Song, C., & Barabási, A.-L.
- Venue
- Science
- Published
- 2013-10-04
- Volume
- 342
- Issue
- 6154
- Pages
- 127-132
- ISSN
- 0036-8075
- 1095-9203
- Cited by
- 753
- References
- 8
- Language
- en
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
