Density, asymmetry and citation dynamics in scientific literature.

Abstract

Scientific behavior is often characterized by a tension between building upon established knowledge and introducing novel ideas. Here, we investigate whether this tension is reflected in the relationship between the similarity of a scientific paper to previous research and its eventual citation rate. To operationalize similarity to previous research, we introduce two complementary metrics to characterize the local geometry of a publication’s semantic neighborhood: (1) density ($\rho$), defined as the ratio between a fixed number of previously-published papers and the minimum distance enclosing those papers in a semantic embedding space, and (2) asymmetry ($\alpha$), defined as the average directional difference between a paper and its nearest neighbors. We tested the predictive relationship between these two metrics and its subsequent citation rate using a Bayesian hierarchical regression approach, surveying ∼53,000 publications across nine academic disciplines and five different document embeddings. While the individual effects of $\rho$ on citation count are small and variable, incorporating density-based predictors consistently improves out-of-sample prediction when added to baseline models. These results suggest that the density of a paper’s surrounding scientific literature may carry modest but informative signals about its eventual impact. Meanwhile, we find no evidence that publication asymmetry improves model predictions of citation rates. Our work provides a scalable framework for linking document embeddings to scientometric outcomes and highlights new questions regarding the role that semantic similarity plays in shaping the dynamics of scientific reward.