# Growth rates of modern science: A latent piecewise growth curve approach to model publication numbers from established and new literature databases

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2012.07675 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2012.07675/

## Key facts

- Cited by 75 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- First posted on arXiv 14 Dec 2020.

## Built on by (most cited first, 30 of 75)

- [Transforming Science with Large Language Models: A Survey on AI-assisted Scientific Discovery, Experimentation, Content Generation, and Evaluation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.05151/) (2025)
- [Predicting the Future of AI with AI: High-quality link prediction in an exponentially growing knowledge network](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2210.00881/) (2022)
- [KARMA: Leveraging Multi-Agent LLMs for Automated Knowledge Graph Enrichment](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.06472/) (2025)
- [TaxoAdapt: Aligning LLM-Based Multidimensional Taxonomy Construction to Evolving Research Corpora](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2506.10737/) (2025)
- [Forecasting high-impact research topics via machine learning on evolving knowledge graphs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.08640/) (2024)
- [Generating Interesting Scientific Ideas using Knowledge Graphs and LLMs: Evaluations with 100 Research Group Leaders](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2405.17044/) (2024)
- [PeerQA: A Scientific Question Answering Dataset from Peer Reviews](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.13668/) (2025)
- [Empowering Scientific Workflows with Federated Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.05428/) (2025)
- [Breaking the Reviewer: Assessing the Vulnerability of Large Language Models in Automated Peer Review Under Textual Adversarial Attacks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2506.11113/) (2025)
- [The Good, the Bad and the Constructive: Automatically Measuring Peer Review's Utility for Authors](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2509.04484/) (2025)
- [Generation of Highlights from Research Papers Using Pointer-Generator Networks and SciBERT Embeddings](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2302.07729/) (2023)
- [Shallow Synthesis of Knowledge in GPT-Generated Texts: A Case Study in Automatic Related Work Composition](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.12255/) (2024)
- [Evaluating the Predictive Capacity of ChatGPT for Academic Peer Review Outcomes Across Multiple Platforms](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2411.09763/) (2024)
- [Named Entity Recognition Based Automatic Generation of Research Highlights](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.12795/) (2023)
- [Efficient Performance Tracking: Leveraging Large Language Models for Automated Construction of Scientific Leaderboards](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2409.12656/) (2024)
- [The Semantic Reader Project: Augmenting Scholarly Documents through AI-Powered Interactive Reading Interfaces](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.14334/) (2023)
- [ArxivDIGESTables: Synthesizing Scientific Literature into Tables using Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2410.22360/) (2024)
- [Can Large Language Models Match the Conclusions of Systematic Reviews?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.22787/) (2025)
- [Understanding Practices around Computational News Discovery Tools in the Domain of Science Journalism](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2311.06864/) (2023)
- [Effective Context Selection in LLM-based Leaderboard Generation: An Empirical Study](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2407.02409/) (2024)
- [Intent-Aware Schema Generation And Refinement For Literature Review Tables](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2507.19521/) (2025)
- [A Multi-Task Evaluation of LLMs' Processing of Academic Text Input](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2508.11779/) (2025)
- [Transforming Scholarly Landscapes: Influence of Large Language Models on Academic Fields beyond Computer Science](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2409.19508/) (2024)
- [SemCSE: Semantic Contrastive Sentence Embeddings Using LLM-Generated Summaries For Scientific Abstracts](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2507.13105/) (2025)
- [SciPostGen: Bridging the Gap between Scientific Papers and Poster Layouts](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2511.22490/) (2025)
- [WisPaper: Your AI Scholar Search Engine](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2512.06879/) (2025)
- [SymTax: Symbiotic Relationship and Taxonomy Fusion for Effective Citation Recommendation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.01606/) (2024)
- [CodeRefine: A Pipeline for Enhancing LLM-Generated Code Implementations of Research Papers](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2408.13366/) (2024)
- [On the Effectiveness of Large Language Models in Automating Categorization of Scientific Texts](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.15745/) (2025)
- [Retrieval Augmented Generation Evaluation for Health Documents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.04680/) (2025)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Growth of science is a prevalent issue in science of science studies. In recent years, two new bibliographic databases have been introduced which can be used to study growth processes in science from centuries back: Dimensions from Digital Science and Microsoft Academic. In this study, we used publication data from these new databases and added publication data from two established databases (Web of Science from Clarivate Analytics and Scopus from Elsevier) to investigate scientific growth processes from the beginning of the modern science system until today. We estimated regression models that included simultaneously the publication counts from the four databases. The results of the unrestricted growth of science calculations show that the overall growth rate amounts to 4.10% with a doubling time of 17.3 years. As the comparison of various segmented regression models in the current study revealed, the model with five segments fits the publication data best. We demonstrated that these segments with different growth rates can be interpreted very well, since they are related to either phases of economic (e.g., industrialization) and / or political developments (e.g., Second World War). In this study, we additionally analyzed scientific growth in two broad fields (Physical and Technical Sciences as well as Life Sciences) and the relationship of scientific and economic growth in UK. The comparison between the two fields revealed only slight differences. The comparison of the British economic and scientific growth rates showed that the economic growth rate is slightly lower than the scientific growth rate.