arXiv preprint ·
Behind the Paper Explosion: Author Growth and Widening Gaps in Computer Science
- Published
- Source
- arXiv preprint, posted before peer review
- Original
- Read it at arXiv
- Topics
Abstract
The rapid growth of computer science (CS) papers increases the work needed to review research and find relevant studies. The growing use of AI tools in scientific writing makes it increasingly important to identify the authors behind this growth. Previous studies have tracked publication growth and followed researchers' careers, documenting the increasing number of authors and the many researchers who publish only briefly. However, annual averages of papers per author reflect different sets of researchers and may hide changes among the same authors. This study addresses this gap by linking individual changes to overall CS paper growth using arXiv, DBLP, and conference submission records for 2010-2025. With each paper divided equally among its authors, the total paper count equals the number of authors multiplied by their average papers per author. This relationship provides a decomposition of the two contributions of paper growth. This decomposition attributes nearly all growth in CS paper volume to an increase in the number of publishing authors. The analysis of author numbers further distinguishes expansion through new and returning arXiv authors from the replacement of authors no longer publishing there. Changes in who publishes also affect the average, motivating comparisons of the same authors over time within groups with similar past paper counts. This comparison identifies substantial replacement within the growing author group. New authors average fewer papers under this counting method, keeping the overall average nearly unchanged despite increases among authors who published in both years. Moreover, statistics show that these increases are uneven, with widening gaps even among authors who previously published similar numbers of papers. These findings provide insights into peer review, community participation, researcher evaluation, and equity within the CS community.
The authors’ abstract, as arXiv lists it. arXiv’s listings, abstracts included, are free for anyone to reuse.
Read it on ReadSearch
Each opens after you create an account, and brings you back to this paper.
More in Digital Libraries
Rebuilding a Field's Open-Problem Catalog from the Literature: A Two-Layer Knowledge Graph, and Why Status Must Stay Proposed
Comparative Evaluation of LLM-Based Review Paradigms for Academic Paper Quality Assessment
Enhancing Knowledge Entity Relation Extraction in Abstracts and Full-text Content of Academic Articles Using Large Language Models
Retrieve-then-Disambiguate: Scalable Reviewer Discovery
Observable-Specific Validity Tests for Scientific AI: Controlled Approximations and Intervention Response
Get the few papers worth your time in Digital Libraries every morning.
ReadSearch reads the new papers in your field each day and brings you the few worth reading, each with its key finding in a sentence.