研究三种新颖性组合如何影响论文影响力，发现仅结果新颖的论文最易成为高被引经典。
Beyond Single-Dimension Novelty: How Combinations of Theory, Method, and Results-based Novelty Shape Scientific Impact
- 从引言内容识别理论、方法、结果三类新颖性，分析其组合模式。
- 仅有结果新颖性的论文五年引用数更高，更可能进入前1%和前10%高被引榜单。
- 多维度新颖性组合反而不如单一结果新颖性影响大，揭示科学影响力的复杂机制。
科学新颖性推动前沿进展，但也伴随更高不确定性与既有范式的阻力，导致复杂的科学影响力模式。以往研究多聚焦单一新颖性维度（如理论、方法或结果）与影响力的关联，但科学新颖性本质上是多维的，孤立分析可能掩盖不同类型新颖性协同作用的影响。为此，本研究基于《自然·通讯》中15,322篇论文数据，利用DeepSeek-V3模型，从引言内容分类出理论新颖性、方法新颖性和结果新颖性三类维度。这些维度可在同一论文中共存，形成不同新颖性配置。科学影响力通过五年引用次数及是否位列前1%或前10%高被引论文衡量。描述性结果显示，仅具结果新颖性，以及同时具备三种新颖性的配置最为常见。回归分析进一步表明，仅具结果新颖性的论文获得显著更多引用，且更可能跻身前1%和前10%高被引论文，优于同时具备三种新颖性的论文。该发现深化了对多维新颖性配置如何塑造知识扩散的理解。
原文摘要 · Abstract (English)
Scientific novelty drives advances at the research frontier, yet it is also associated with heightened uncertainty and potential resistance from incumbent paradigms, leading to complex patterns of scientific impact. Prior studies have primarily ex-amined the relationship between a single dimension of novelty -- such as theoreti-cal, methodological, or results-based novelty -- and scientific impact. However, because scientific novelty is inherently multidimensional, focusing on isolated dimensions may obscure how different types of novelty jointly shape impact. Consequently, we know little about how combinations of novelty types influence scientific impact. To this end, we draw on a dataset of 15,322 articles published in Nature Communications. Using the DeepSeek-V3 model, we classify articles into three novelty dimensions based on the content of their Introduction sections: theoretical novelty, methodological novelty, and results-based novelty. These dimensions may coexist within the same article, forming distinct novelty configura-tions. Scientific impact is measured using five-year citation counts and indicators of whether an article belongs to the top 1% or top 10% highly cited papers. Descriptive results indicate that results-based novelty alone and the simultaneous presence of all three novelty types are the dominant configurations in the sample. Regression results further show that articles with results-based novelty only re-ceive significantly more citations and are more likely to rank among the top 1% and top 10% highly cited papers than articles exhibiting all three novelty types. These findings advance our understanding of how multidimensional novelty configurations shape knowledge diffusion.
Thank you to arXiv for use of its open access interoperability. PaperDance 不是 arXiv 官方产品；中文卡片由大模型生成，请以原文为准。