Open science start-up DeSci Labs has expanded its novelty score feature to provide content and context novelty scores for all newly uploaded research articles. This development allows scientists to gauge the uniqueness and originality of their work compared to existing literature, offering potential advantages for publication and funding applications.
The novelty score feature, initially launched last year for already published papers, is the first data-driven measure of novelty available to researchers. It applies a statistical method developed by Professors Feng Shi and James Evans at the University of Chicago. DeSci Labs has now extended this method to all 250 million articles available via OpenAlex, 55 million of which are open access.
The scoring system incentivises innovative research by quantifying two distinct aspects of novelty. Content novelty evaluates the combinations of topics and concepts in a manuscript, while context novelty assesses the diversity of cited sources in its reference list. By identifying unconventional approaches and diverse citations, the system aims to accelerate scientific progress.
Discovering novel insights is crucial in scientific research and is central to the peer review process used by journals and funding bodies. Traditionally, novelty assessments are subjective and can take months, often leading to rejections due to perceived lack of originality. With DeSci Publish’s automated novelty scoring, researchers receive instant feedback, enabling them to make informed decisions before submitting their work for review. The scores do not replace peer review but serve as an additional tool for editors and reviewers.
Professor Philipp Koellinger, CEO and co-founder of DeSci Labs, highlighted the significance of this advancement: “For several months, we have had novelty metrics available to measure some of the most high-profile studies in science, including Nobel Prize-winning works on DeSci Publish. Now, scientists can obtain novelty scores for their own manuscripts, along with data, code, and other supporting artefacts.”
He emphasised that providing researchers with access to these metrics marks a key step towards making scientific publishing more democratic and efficient. “Making novelty scores available to researchers assessing their own work is a crucial milestone on the road to achieving our goal of accelerating scientific progress while democratising the scientific publishing landscape.”
