从文献计量学角度看希格斯玻色子研究的起源和历史根源
On the origins and the historical roots of the Higgs boson research from a bibliometric perspective
摘要：
本文的主题是从文献计量学的角度分析希格斯玻色子研究的起源或历史根源，使用分段回归分析在参考出版物年光谱学（RPYS）。我们的分析是基于自1974年以来发表的希格斯玻色子出版物中引用的参考文献。我们分析的目的包括确定科学界经常提到的希格斯玻色子研究背景下的具体个人出版物。因此，我们感兴趣的是在很大程度上有助于发现希格斯玻色子的开创性工作。我们的研究结果表明，希格斯玻色子领域的研究人员更倾向于参考最近发表的论文-特别是自60年代初以来发表的论文。例如，我们的分析揭示了60年代出现的七个主要贡献：关于希格斯机制的恩格勒和布劳特（1964）、希格斯（1964，2篇论文）和古拉尔尼克等人（1964），以及关于弱相互作用和电磁相互作用统一的埃克塞特豪（1961）、温伯格（1967）和萨拉姆（1968）。即使诺贝尔奖突出了彼得·希格斯和弗朗索瓦·恩格勒的工作的突出重要性，文献计量学也提供了额外的可能性，可以从这个研究领域的其他出版物（特别是历史出版物）中获得提示，从专家的角度来看，这些出版物至关重要。
英文摘要：
Subject of our present paper is the analysis of the origins or historical roots of the Higgs boson research from a bibliometric perspective, using a segmented regression analysis in a reference publication year spectroscopy (RPYS). Our analysis is based on the references cited in the Higgs boson publications published since 1974. The objective of our analysis consists of identifying concrete individual publications in the Higgs boson research context to which the scientific community frequently had referred to. As a consequence, we are interested in seminal works which contributed to a high extent to the discovery of the Higgs boson. Our results show that researchers in the Higgs boson field preferably refer to more recently published papers - particular papers published since the beginning of the sixties. For example, our analysis reveals seven major contributions which appeared within the sixties: Englert and Brout (1964), Higgs (1964, 2 papers), and Guralnik et al. (1964) on the Higgs mechanism as well as Glashow (1961), Weinberg (1967), and Salam (1968) on the unification of weak and electromagnetic interaction. Even if the Nobel Prize award highlights the outstanding importance of the work of Peter Higgs and Francois Englert, bibliometrics offer the additional possibility of getting hints to other publications in this research field (especially to historical publications), which are of vital importance from the expert point of view.
机构、总结、中文摘要均由AI分析而来，可能存在错误，请以论文正文为准。
