Growth rates of modern science: A bibliometric analysis based on the number of publications and cited references
Open accessAbstract
Many studies in information science have looked at the growth of science. In this study, we re-examine the question of the growth of science. To do this we (i) use current data up to publication year 2012 and (ii) analyse it across all disciplines and also separately for the natural sciences and for the medical and health sciences. Furthermore, the data are analysed with an advanced statistical technique - segmented regression analysis - which can identify specific segments with similar growth rates in the history of science. The study is based on two different sets of bibliometric data: (1) The number of publications held as source items in the Web of Science (WoS, Thomson Reuters) per publication year and (2) the number of cited references in the publications of the source items per cited reference year. We have looked at the rate at which science has grown since the mid-1600s. In our analysis of cited references we identified three growth phases in the development of science, which each led to growth rates tripling in comparison with the previous phase: from less than 1% up to the middle of the 18th century, to 2 to 3% up to the period between the two world wars and 8 to 9% to 2012.
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
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?
Between the two world wars, the annual growth rate of scientific research results was 2%-3%; in 2012, it was 8-9%, corresponding to a doubling within 9 years.
“In the period between the two world wars, the annual growth rate of scientific research results ( ' output ' ) was 2% -3%. In 2012, the growth rate was already 8 -9%, which corresponds to a doubling of the output within 9 years (Bornmann and Mutz 2014).”
From The structural transformation of the scientific public sphere: Constitution and consequences of the path towards open access (2024) · cites this paper as Bornmann and Mutz 2014
Split into 2 atoms — 0 confirmed, 2 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.
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.
Cites
de Solla Price, D. J., & Page, T. (1961) · American Journal of Physics · doi:10.1119/1.1937650 · Cited by 444 · see citing works
CAB: Citation-Assisted Background
Kostoff, R. N., & Shlesinger, M. F. (2005) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-005-0014-8 · Cited by 38 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Artificial intelligence for literature reviews: opportunities and challenges
Bolaños, F., Salatino, A., Osborne, F., & Motta, E. (2024) · Artificial Intelligence Review · doi:10.1007/s10462-024-10902-3 · Cited by 246 · see citing works
Dobusch, L., & Heimstädt, M. (2024) · Philosophy & Social Criticism · doi:10.1177/01914537231203558 · Cited by 8 · see citing works
AIM review tool: artificial intelligence for smarter systematic review screening
Mena, S., Rituerto-González, E., Coutts, F., von Trott, J., Jacobs, G. R., Bryant, L., Moles, L., Sirbu, N., Promet, L., Oliver, D., et al. (2026) · npj Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1038/s44387-026-00080-8
- Authors
- Bornmann, L., & Mutz, R.
- Affiliations
- Max Planck Society (DE)
- ORCID
- Bornmann, Lutz
- Venue
- arXiv
- Publisher
- arXiv
- Published
- 2014
- ISSN
- 2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
- arXiv
- 1402.4578
- OpenAlex
- W2952853891
- Cited by
- 11
- References
- 2
- Citations by year
- 2025: 2 · 2024: 1 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 3 · 2018: 1 · 2016: 1
- Type
- posted content
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- arxiv.org
- Locations
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › scientometrics and bibliometrics research
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Library Science and Information
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Psychology Research and Bibliometrics
- Keywords
- scientific development, scientific publications, cited references, growth rate, segmented regression, history of science, medical and health sciences, disciplinary comparison, Web of Science
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
