RECORD
The decline of disruptive science and technology
Social and Information Networks · Submitted 21 Jun 2021
abstract compiled · 2026-09-23 · no language-model review
The authors' main claim Overall, our results suggest that slowing rates of disruption may reflect a fundamental shift in the nature of science and technology.
The compiled record
The paper's own sentences, arranged. Each label is drawn from a closed vocabulary; the number beside it is the probability the classifier gave that label. Numbers in the tables are the authors', checked by code. No sentence in this record was written by a model.
Open the compiled record
The abstract, sentence by sentence
Theories of scientific and technological change view discovery and invention as endogenous processes, wherein prior accumulated knowledge enables future progress by allowing researchers to, in Newton's words, "stand on the shoulders of giants". Recent decades have witnessed exponential growth in the volume of new scientific and technological knowledge, thereby creating conditions that should be ripe for major advances. Yet contrary to this view, studies suggest that progress is slowing in several major fields of science and technology. Here, we analyze these claims at scale across 6 decades, using data on 45 million papers and 3.5 million patents from 6 large-scale datasets. We find that papers and patents are increasingly less likely to break with the past in ways that push science and technology in new directions, a pattern that holds universally across fields. Subsequently, we link this decline in disruptiveness to a narrowing in the use of prior knowledge, allowing us to reconcile the patterns we observe with the "shoulders of giants" view. We find that the observed declines are unlikely to be driven by changes in the quality of published science, citation practices, or field-specific factors. Overall, our results suggest that slowing rates of disruption may reflect a fundamental shift in the nature of science and technology.
background contribution method result interpretation main claim
| # | sentence | role | the authors' own work | states the main conclusion | strength |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| s0 | Theories of scientific and technological change view discovery and invention as endogenous processes, wherein prior accumulated knowledge enables future progress by allowing researchers to, in Newton's words, "stand on the shoulders of giants". | background 1.00 | 0.03 | 0.02 | asserted 1.00 |
| s1 | Recent decades have witnessed exponential growth in the volume of new scientific and technological knowledge, thereby creating conditions that should be ripe for major advances. | background 1.00 | 0.06 | 0.02 | asserted 0.92 |
| s2 | Yet contrary to this view, studies suggest that progress is slowing in several major fields of science and technology. | background 0.89 | 0.05 | 0.06 | hedged possibility 0.96 |
| s3 | Here, we analyze these claims at scale across 6 decades, using data on 45 million papers and 3.5 million patents from 6 large-scale datasets. | method 0.87 | 0.95 | 0.02 | asserted 0.91 |
| s4 | We find that papers and patents are increasingly less likely to break with the past in ways that push science and technology in new directions, a pattern that holds universally across fields. | result 1.00 | 0.97 | 0.81 | asserted 1.00 |
| s5 | Subsequently, we link this decline in disruptiveness to a narrowing in the use of prior knowledge, allowing us to reconcile the patterns we observe with the "shoulders of giants" view. | interpretation 0.72 | 0.92 | 0.33 | asserted 0.93 |
| s6 | We find that the observed declines are unlikely to be driven by changes in the quality of published science, citation practices, or field-specific factors. | result 0.98 | 0.92 | 0.08 | asserted 0.65 |
| s7 | Overall, our results suggest that slowing rates of disruption may reflect a fundamental shift in the nature of science and technology. | interpretation 1.00 | 0.73 | 0.77 | hedged possibility 1.00 |
What was examined, and what was not
- arXiv listing abstract v5
- full text
- figures and tables
- references and citing sentences
- relations to other papers
- P abstract
- S sections
- T body sentences
- C citations
- R cross-paper relations
The paper
Original abstract
Theories of scientific and technological change view discovery and invention as endogenous processes, wherein prior accumulated knowledge enables future progress by allowing researchers to, in Newton's words, "stand on the shoulders of giants". Recent decades have witnessed exponential growth in the volume of new scientific and technological knowledge, thereby creating conditions that should be ripe for major advances. Yet contrary to this view, studies suggest that progress is slowing in several major fields of science and technology. Here, we analyze these claims at scale across 6 decades, using data on 45 million papers and 3.5 million patents from 6 large-scale datasets. We find that papers and patents are increasingly less likely to break with the past in ways that push science and technology in new directions, a pattern that holds universally across fields. Subsequently, we link this decline in disruptiveness to a narrowing in the use of prior knowledge, allowing us to reconcile the patterns we observe with the "shoulders of giants" view. We find that the observed declines are unlikely to be driven by changes in the quality of published science, citation practices, or field-specific factors. Overall, our results suggest that slowing rates of disruption may reflect a fundamental shift in the nature of science and technology.
Human review
Discussion
Know something about this paper? Leave a comment, or highlight any passage above to comment on it.