论文部分内容阅读
该文以科技文献为分析基础,从数量与质量方面比较了中美之间科技发展的差距。数量比较选择了SCI、INSPEC、Ei Compendex三大数据库,而质量比较则是应用了SCI中的引文分析。根据作者以前对中国科技产出的评估,该文选择了30个技术研究领域,全面考察了中国在物质科学、环境、工程和生命科学重点发展方向上论文数量情况。SCI数据显示在几乎所有的技术领域内,虽然中国在论文数量方面增幅很大,但美国仍然处于领先地位(2002-2007)。到2007年,INSPEC数据表明,在大多数技术领域内,中国的科技论文数量赶上或超过了美国;但在生物医学和部分环境科学领域,美国仍然保持着较大的领先优势。Ei Compendex的数据分析结果表明,对于大多数技术领域,到2007年中国的科技论文产量更大;而与日益增长的科研经费恰恰相反,美国发表论文的数量似乎在2005年就已经到达了顶峰。如果不考虑生物医学领域,中国显然已经成为美国的强劲竞争对手。为了对质量进行比较,该文对论文和引文数量进行了归一化处理,但仅限于纳米技术领域(1998-2003年)。结果表明,虽然在过去的10年里美国在质量方面明显地领先中国(以及其他主要纳米技术研究国家),但依然不能改表中国的论文质量持续提升的事实。中国目前已经达到可以与法国、意大利、日本和澳大利亚的论文质量相提并论的地步。
Based on the scientific literature, this paper compares the differences in science and technology between China and the United States in quantity and quality. Comparison of the number of selected SCI, INSPEC, Ei Compendex three databases, and quality comparison is the application of SCI citation analysis. According to the author's previous assessment of the output of Chinese science and technology, the article selected 30 technical research fields and comprehensively examined the number of papers on the key development directions of material sciences, environment, engineering and life sciences in China. The SCI data show that in almost all technical fields, the United States is still at the leading position (2002-2007) although China has seen a dramatic increase in the number of papers. By 2007, INSPEC data indicates that the number of scientific papers in China overtook or exceeded that of the United States in most technical fields; however, the United States still maintains a large lead in biomedicine and some environmental sciences. Ei Compendex's data analysis shows that for most technology fields, the output of scientific papers in China is even larger by 2007; on the contrary to the growing research funding, the number of papers published in the United States seems to have peaked in 2005. If you do not consider the field of biomedicine, China has apparently become a strong competitor to the United States. In order to compare quality, the paper normalized the number of papers and citations, but only in the field of nanotechnology (1998-2003). The results show that while the United States has clearly preceded China in qualitative terms over the past 10 years (and other major nanotechnology research countries), the fact that the quality of papers in China continues to improve can not be rephrassed. China has now reached the point where it can be compared with the quality of theses in France, Italy, Japan and Australia.