[目的/意义] 解决颠覆性指数在数学性质上存在的不一致性问题，并探讨颠覆性指数在应用中的影响因素。[方法/过程] 首先指出颠覆性指数D的不一致性表现，然后对其改进得到相对性颠覆性指数Rela_DZ和绝对性颠覆性指数DZ；最后从引文时间窗、学科差异和文献类型3个角度，分析影响颠覆性指数差异的因素。[结果/结论] Rela_DZ算法解决了D关于NR非单调的问题，DZ算法解决了D关于NF、NB不严格单调的问题，从而避免了不一致性；将颠覆性指数的相对性与绝对性两个算法结合，在应用中将更加合理。此外，颠覆性指数Rela_DZ和DZ受引文时间窗、学科和文献类型的影响，因此，在应用时应进行必要的处理。
[Purpose/significance] To solve the inconsistency of disruption index D, and investigate the affecting factors of disruption index in specific applications.[Method/process] This paper pointed out the inconsistency problem of disruption index D, and then proposed Rela_DZ and DZ as alternatives to solve the inconsistency problem of D. Finally, the factors affecting Rela_DZ and DZ were studied from the perspective of citation time window, discipline difference and document types.[Result/conclusion] Rela_DZ avoids the inconsistency problem by solving the non-monotonic problem of D with respect to NR. DZ overcomes the non-strict monotonic problem of D with respect to NF and NB. Taking into account the relative and absolute disruption index will result in more reasonable results. In addition, Rela_DZ and DZ are influenced by citation time window, disciplines and document types. Necessary processing steps are needed when applying the disruption index.
[1] 李志民. 中国科技评价改革:如何演变?趋势如何?[EB/OL].[2019-08-29].https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/if_RXwKGaBqfppWGQ-M9Rw.
[2] UZZI B, MUKHERJEE S. A typical combinations and scientific impact[J]. Science, 2013, 342(6157):468-472.
[3] LEE Y, WALSH J P, WANG J. Creativity in scientific teams:unpacking novelty and impact[J]. Research policy, 2015,44(3):684-697.
[4] WANG J, VEUGELERS R, STEPHAN P. Bias against novelty in science:a cautionary tale for users of bibliometric indicators[J]. Research policy, 2017(46):1416-1436.
[5] HE Y, LUO J. Novelty, conventionality, and value of invention[M]//Design compyting and cognition'16. Cham:Springer International Publishing, 2017:23-38.
[6] BOYACK K, KLAVANS R. Is the most innovative research being funded?[EB/OL].[2020-12-08] https://www.elsevier.com/__data/assets/pdf_file/0005/479426/boyack_sti_final.pdf.
[7] KLAVANS R, BOYACK K. Towards the development of an article-level indicator of conformity, innovation and deviation[C]//Proceedings of 18th international conference on science and technology indicators. Berlin:STI, 2013:185-192.
[8] CARAYOL N, LAHATTE A, LLOPIS O. Novelty in science presented at STI 2017[EB/OL].[2020-12-08] https://digital.csic.es/bitstream/10261/162613/1/novelty.pdf.
[9] 王艳艳, 张均胜, 乔晓东, 等. 基于问题-方法矩阵的文献新颖性评估方法[J/OL].情报理论与实践:1-13.[2020-11-03].http://kns.cnki.net/kcms/detail/11.1762.G3.20201030.1621.002.html.
[10] 逯万辉, 谭宗颖. 学术成果主题新颖性测度方法研究——基于Doc2Vec和HMM算法[J]. 数据分析与知识发现, 2018,2(3):22-29.
[11] 沈阳. 一种基于关键词的创新度评价方法[J]. 情报理论与实践, 2007(1):125-127.
[12] 杨建林, 钱玲飞. 基于关键词对逆文档频率的主题新颖度度量方法[J]. 情报理论与实践, 2013,36(3):99-102.
[13] MISHRA S, TORVIK V. Quantifying conceptual novelty in the biomedical literature[J]. D-Lib magazine, 2016,22:9-10.
[14] PACKALEN M, BHATTACHARYA J. Cities and ideas[EB/OL].[2020-10-16]. http://www.nber.org/papers/w20921.
[15] CALLAWAY E. Young scientists lead the way on fresh ideas[J]. Nature, 2015,7539(518):283.
[16] TRAPIDO D. How novelty in knowledge earns recognition:the role of consistent identities[J]. Research policy, 2015,8(44):1488-1500.
[17] FUNK R, SMITH J. A dynamic network measure of technological change[J]. Management science, 2017,63(3):791-817.
[18] WU L, WANG D, EVANS J. Large teams develop and small teams disrupt science and technology[J]. Nature, 2019, 566(7744):378-382.
[19] BORNMANN L, TEKLES A. Disruptive papers published in Scientometrics[J]. Scientometrics, 2019,120(1):331-336.
[20] BORNMANN L, TEKLES A. Disruption index depends on length of citation window[J]. EI profesional de la Informacion, 2019,28(2):1-2.
[21] BORNMANN L, DEVARAKONDA S, TEKLES A, et al. Do disruption index indicators measure what they propose to measure? The comparison of several indicator variants with assessments by peers[EB/OL].[2020-03-20]. https://arxiv.org/abs/1911.08775.
[22] BORNMANN L, DEVARAKONDA S, TEKLES A, et al. Disruptive papers published in Scientometrics:meaningful results by using an improved variant of the disruption index originally proposed by Wu, Wang, and Evans (2019)[J]. Scientometrics, 2020,123(2):1149-1155.
[23] WU Q, YAN Z. Solo citations, duet citations, and prelude citations:new measures of the disruption of academic papers[EB/OL].[2020-02-21]. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/332977541_Solo_citations_duet_citations_and_prelude_citations_New_measures_of_the_disruption_of_academic_papers.
[24] 认知相符理论[EB/OL].[2020-02-21].https://wiki.mbalib.com/wiki/%E8%AE%A4%E7%9F%A5%E7%9B%B8%E7%AC%A6%E7%90%86%E8%AE%BA.
[25] ROUSSEAU R. The F-measure for research priority[J]. Journal of data and information science, 2018(3):1-18.
[26] WALTMAN L, VAN ECK N. The inconsistency of the h-index[J]. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 2012,63(2):406-415.
[27] EGGHE L, ROUSSEAU R. A general frame-work for relative impact indicators[J]. Canadian journal of information and library science-revue canadienne des sciences del information et de bibliotheconomie, 2002,27(1):29-48.
[28] WU S, WU Q. A confusing definition of disruption[EB/OL].[2020-12-29]. https://osf.io/preprints/socarxiv/d3wpk/.
