The

EUGENE GARFIELDiNsr8Tur E FOR SCt EM TIFIC IN60UMATION~3501 MARKET ST PHILADELPHIA F’4 19104

The Russians Are Coming! Part 1.Red-Hot 100 Soviet Scientists, 1973-1988

Number 24 June 11, 1990

There has beenincreasedinterest in Soviet science and technology as a resolt of glasnost arrdperesrroika.A study of Soviet papers based on 1973-1988 data from the lS1° Science Indicators ffle was under-taken. Part 1 examines the lCO most-cited Soviet scientists. The data indicate that nonmembers ofthe USSR Academy of Sciences were cited more frequently than members. During this period Sovietphysics dominated, with secondary emphasis in chemistry and life-sciences research. Soviet bimhemistand sciencehistorian Zhores A. Medvedev, National Institute for Medical Research, Mill Hill, London,UK, explains why physics research and physicists dominate. Soviet science.

Soviet Science Under Gorbachev’sGfusnost

In many ways 1989 was a watershed yearfor the Soviet Union. The changes, sweptalong by perestroih (restructuring) andglasnost (openness), would not have beenpredicted just five years ago. And activitiesthat have already taken place in early 1990indicate that this year may be even moreeventtid. Who would have thought it possi-ble that a multiparty system, the creation ofa Western-style presidency, and a cabinetsystem of government would be suggestedby the general secretary of the Soviet Com-munist party? And that these unprecedentedsuggestions would be enacted by the Com-munist party Central Cotnrnittee?l

Glasnost and perestroika have raisedhopes not just for improved political andeconomic conditions, but also for moreopenness and freedom in Soviet science, In-deed, over the past 24 months, a number ofnew scientific links have been establishedbetween the USSR and the West, but espe-cially between the Soviet Union and its coldwar rival, the US. The unprecedented ar-rival of a top level delegation-led by USSRAcademy of Sciences vice president Kon-stantin V. Frolov—to the annual AmericanAssociation for the Advancement of Science

meeting in Boston in February 1988markeda new chapter in the US/USSR scientificdirdogue.2 Since then, exchange agree-ments have been reached between variousUSSR science delegations and the US Na-tional Academy of Sciences (NAS), the USInstitute of Medicine, the American Soci-ety of Mechanical Engineers, the AmericanChemical Society, and other associa-tions. 3,4

In 1989 the increasing number of links be-tween the US and the USSR turned from ex-change agreements towards science coop-eration pacts. In March an agreement wassigned between the University of Michigan,Ann Arbor; the Massachusetts Institute ofTechnology, Cambridge; the BrookhavenNational Laboratory, Upton, New York;and the USSR Academy of Sciences-afffli-ated Institute for High Energy Physics, Prot-vino, where 15 American and 15 Sovietphysicists will conduct a joint experimentat a Soviet accelerator in mid-199 1.s InAugust the US Geological Survey, the In-corporated Research Institution for Seismol-ogy, and the USSR Academy of Sciencesagreed to collaborate on earthquake detec-tion, including setting up further monitor-ing stations in both countries.6 The NASand the USSR Academy of Sciences put to-gether plans in December for a joint com-

202

mittet to study @Obd ewlogy,7 and NASAand USSR space officials rtx+chedagreementon efforts to initiate cooperative biomedicalresearch on both the US space shuttle andthe Soviet modular space station kfir.s InMarch 1990 Vice President Dan Quayle an-nounced that the US would provide ground-based hardware and services for a Sovietradiotelescope to be launched in themid- 1990s.9

Within the past 12 months, the influenceof gfa.wmt has resulted in unprecedenteddisclosures of previously unknown aspectsof the Soviet scien= and technology estab-lishment. These include information onfailed or disastrous state-spamored projects(such as their manned lunarlo-lz and nu-clear energyls-ls programs), as well as thefirst release of detailed economic data onhow the Soviet Union spends its rubles onscience. According to figures released lastSeptember by the USSR’s minister of fi-nance, Valentin Pavlov, the government hasearmarked 11 billion rubles (which wouldcompare to about 17.34 billion US dollars)for civilian research in the budget for 1990,compared with just 7.3 billion (or about11.5 billion dollars) in 1989. This representsa boost from 1.5 percent to 2.3 percent oftotal state spending. The Soviets are goingto lay particular stress this year on the fieldsof biomedicine and health. lb

It remains to be seen how glasnost willaffect the publication output of Soviet sci-entists, but there are potentially encourag-ing signs that freer and wider circulation ofresearch is indeed possible in the USSR. TheSupreme Soviet (parliament), for example,has passed a iaw allowing private ownershipof photocopying machines, and the gover-nmentis in the final stages of allowing theunregulated sale of uncensored Westernperiodicals and newspapers across the coun-tv.17

A recent example of the new publishingenvironment is the recently launched Sovietjournal Biomedical Science. Is The journalis a joint venture between the USSR Acad-emy of Sciences, the British Royal Societyof Chemistry, and the UK scientific pub-lisher Pion. This English-language, interna-

tional journal will no doubt increase theawareness—and prestige—of Russian life-sciences research not only in the West, butalso among the Soviets themselves. Indeed,the same consortium has announced plansfor another journal entitled MendekyevCommunicadons, according to recent Sovietvisitors Elia Moiseev and Mark Volpin,whom I had a chance to meet in mid-Aprilwhen I visited Cornell University, Ithaca,New York.

Even before the Gorbachev era, ISI”acted to increase exchanges in informationscience by hosting Soviet visitors to Phila-delphia. Physicist Sergei P. Kapitza (son ofNobelist Pyotr L. Kapitza), Institute forPhysical Problems, Moscow, was the firstSoviet scientist to accept an invitation andwas here in March 1987.19Others includedmarine biologist Alexander I. Pudovkin, In-stitute of Marine Biology, Vladivostok(November 1987-April 1988);zo mathema-tician Vladimir V. Nalimov, Laborato~ ofStatistical Methods, Moscow State Univer-sity (OctobeAXcember 1988);21and infor-mation scientist Valentina A. Markusova,chief, Information Department, Far-EastBranch of the USSR Academy of SciencesAll-Union Institute for Scientific andTechnical Information, Moscow (Septem-ber 1989-January 1990).2’2Markusova gavemuch invaluable input towards the develop-ment of this essay. More recently, informa-tion scientist Irinia V. Marshakova-Shaikevich (who independently dkcovered“co-citation anaiysis” with Henry Small, dl-rector of 1S1’sCorporate Research Depart-mentzq.zq), Institute for Philosophy, USSRAcademy of Sciences, Moscow, was ourguest.

With the USSR today generating so muchinterest, and considering that the last timea study of highly cited Soviet papers ap-peared in Current Contents@ (C4Y j wasnearly 15 years ago,zs we decided that amore up-to-date citation analysis of Sovietscience was appropriate. This is not to saywe and others have totally ignored EasternEurope, but for obvious reasons their workhas had limited impact in our usual studiessf international high impact research.

203

Methodology and the Question ofInstitutional Affiliations

While a study limited to the last few yearswould give a more current perspective onSoviet science, we decided to examine theSoviet scientific literature for a period of 15years. This provides the best opportunityto identi~ high impact Soviet papers and au-thors. The data used to do this study comesfrom 1S1’sScience htdicafors file. This file,which covers 4.5 million cited papers pub-lished between 1973 and 1988, is a subsetof 1S1’sentire 1945-1988 Science Citafion[ndexm (SCP ) database. The papers iden-tified in the file were cited at least once.Nearly 3,830,000 source items in the SCIwere never cited in this period. For thisstudy we rettieved 180,000 cited articlespublished by Soviet scientists from 1973through 1988. From these, we selected 892high impact papers cited at least 50 timesfor analysis and discussion here. The analy-sis is based on all-author data; it is notlimited to first authors.

It shoufd be stressed that Soviet scientistswho published hlgbly cited articles before1973 will not show up in the file. For ex-~Ple, physicist and Nobel laureate LW D.Landau was ranked second in a study of the250 most-cited primary authors in the1961-1975 SC[.Z6 However, Landau (whodied in 1968) published papers from the1930s up through the mid- 1960s and there-fore does not appear in our sample. A fas-cinating review of his relationship to Nobel-ist Kapitza appears in a recent book

review. 27An additional caveat is that Soviet scien-

tists were identified solely when their homeinstitutional address was provided. That is,any time an institution from the USSR waslisted by any coauthor, the paper wascredked to the Soviet Union. But if a Sovietscientist happens to have been abroad on aresearch exchange and listed an address out-side the USSR, the paper would not becredited as behg Soviet. A case in point isa paper authored by the influential Sovietmathematician and academician Ludwig D.Faddeev, “Operator anomaly for the Gauss

law,” which examines anomalies of low-strength magnetic fields. 28The article waspublished in 1984 and was cited nearly 160times through the end of 1988. But Fad-deev’s listed address was the Scuoia Nor-male Strperiore di Piss, Italy, where he hadbeen working at the time.

However, this type of address problem forSoviet scientists is not as amoying as hav-ing no author address at all. CC readers arewell aware of our campaigns to get journalsto list authors’ addresses .z$’.so Indeed,although many Soviet journals covered bythe SCI and CC do have authors’ addresses,many still do not. It is commonly said thatnational security considerations or secrecylaws have prevented and continue to preventmany of the authors from listing their insti-tutional affdiations and even their names onoccasion. Soviet science historian and bio-chemist Zhores A. Medvedev, National In-stitute for Medical Research, Mifl Hill, Lon-don, UK, expands upon this theme:

One of the main reasons why there areno addresses is the simple fact that manysecret institutes simply do not have redgeographical addresses and names. Theyare known only as a post-office box num-ber. For example, the very large nuclear-energy research complex near Kyshtymwhere the main Soviet center of plutoniumproduction is located, as well as a biolog-ical reservation and experimental agricul-tural station, is only known as Posr BoxChelyabinsk-40... . The whole “atomic”town near Kyshtym has no name, but hasabout 100,000 residents . . . . However,thecensorshipwhichstillexiststopreventthe@blication]ofchwsitiedinformationdoesnot allow articles with such addresses. 3]

One may ask, why bother to publish at allif the authors are not free to discuss theirwork through correspondence or other per-sonal contact?Az I can only hope thatglasnost allows all Soviet scientists whopublish papers in the future to list not onlyart address, but even telephone and fax num-bers.

The problem of missing or uninformativeauthor addresses complicates our efforts toidentify the most-cited Soviet scientists. This

204

makes it particularly difficult to distinguishbetween homographs—that is, different au-thors with the same last name and initials.Usually, most homographs can be quicklyresolved by examining the journals of pub-lication—if they are in widely divergentfields, such as immunology and petroleumengineering, we can differentiate betweenthe two or three authors in question. How-ever, if the homographic authors publish inthe same set of field-specific journals, werely on institutional affiliations to sort themout. Obviously, this strategy is less effec-tive in dealing with potential Soviet homo-graphs if there are no addresses. Short ofcontacting every known author listed and re-questing complete bibliographies-a time-consuming and expensive undertaking—there is no guarantee that the homographproblem is completely solved. We have, ofcourse, made every effort to ensure the ac-curacy of our list of most-cited Soviet sci-entists and are confident that the homographproblem has been kept to a minimum.

The Soviet 100-WMther theAcademy Members?

Table 1 lists the top 100 scientists who

were most cited for their publications in1973-1988. The columns of tabular datashow, in order from the left, 1973 through1988 citations, number of papers in the15-year period, average number of citationsper paper (’‘impact’‘), and 1988 citations foreach author. Members of the USSR Acad-emy of Sciences are identified by an asterisk,and corresponding members by a dagger.

The Academy of Sciences is the principalcoordinating body for science, technology,and production in the Soviet Union. Underthe Council of Ministers of the USSR, theacademy directs the research of all acade-mies of the 15 Union republics and other sci-entific institutions, including universities. Atthe present time, the academy controls theoperation and funding of more than 260 in-stitutions, university and government lab-oratories, naval institutes, observatories, re-search stations, and scientific societies. 33

Membership in the academy is by elec-tion and is basically of two types-acade-micians and corresponding members. De-spite the different appellation, there is reallynot much difference between the two, otherthan a bonus the scientist receives. For anacademician, it is 500 mbles over his sahtry;for a corresponding member, 250 rubles. Infact, the difference is so negligible that dis-cussions are now under way to dispense withthe corresponding member designation.(However, according to Medvedev, full ac-ademicians are also entitled to a state &chain prestigious country villages.sl)

Considering the influence of the USSRAcademy of Sciences in determining scienceand technology policy, one would expsctthat academy members would be quiteprominent in a study of the highest impactSoviet scientists. But this is not the case. Thefour most-cited scientists are neither acade-micians nor corresponding members: phys-icists V.S. Letokhov, V.I. Zakharov, M.A.Shifman, and A.I. Vainshtein. And only 35of the top 100 Soviet scientists belong to theacademy. Three of the academicians-bio-chemist Yuri A. Ovchinnikov, chemistAnatoli N. Nesmeyanov (former presidentof the academy), and nuclear physicistYakov B. Zeldovich—are deceased. Thereis also another deceased scientist on our list,V.M. Zhdanov, who was a member of theAcademy of Medical Sciences.

On the topic of academy representation inTable 1, I think that-in all fairness-itshould be noted that we cannot say thatmembers of non-Soviet academies are uni-versally highly cited. When we studied the1,000 most-cited authors in 1981, only 240of the 736 identified US scientists weremembers of the NAS. 34

A Who’s Who of Soviet Sk5ence:Physicists Dominate

Of the 100 most-cited Soviet scientists inTable 1, roughly a third (35) of the authorslisted are physicists. They are followed byLifescientists (32), chemists (30), and space-science researchers (3). These scientific dis-

205

Table 1: The 100 mnat-cited Soviet mrtfrnra. Data are from the lSI@ Science Indicators ffle, 1973-1988.A= 1973-1988 citations. B =cited papers by this author, C= average citations pa paper. D =citations receivedin 1988. Memhecs of the USSR Academy of Sciences are indicated witfr an aateriak (*); cocrcaperdng membersare indicated with a dagger (t)

1. LetnkhovvshlStitUk of SpectroscopyTmitak

2. Zakharnv V IThrmreticaf and Experinrerrtaf Physics hrstinne(A)Moscow

3. Shifxmm M AThcoreticaf and Experirnentaf Physics Institute(A)Moscow

4. Vainahteirr A 1Theoretical and Experimental Physics hrstitute(A)Moscow

5, *Ovc_~~ Y A

M.M. Shemyakin Binnrganic chemistry Irraritute(A)Mnxcow

6. tPolyakov A ML. D. Landau Theoretical Physics InstituteMoscow

7, OK~hetkn~ N K

ND. Zelinski Organic Chemistry Institute(A)Moscow

8. tVoronkov M GLnstitutc of Organic Chenrky[A)Irkmak

9, •~Okb~r*~ A M

fnstitrrte of General Physics(A)Moscow

10. ●Gencgiev G PV.A. Engelhardt Molecular Biology Institme(A)Moscow

11. LirrdeADP.N. Lebedev Physics Institute(A)Moscow

12. *KorahrrkV VA.N. Nesmeyanov Organoclementaf Compmnds Institute(A)Moscow

13. Berdrr I VM.V. Lomonosov State UniversityDepartment of ChemistryMoscow

14. tprrdovik A NA .E. Arbuzov Organic and Physical Chemistry Institute(A)Kazan

15. ●ZMcov N SM .V. Lomonosnv State UniversityDepartment of ChemistryMoscow

16. ●Nes.meyarrov A NA. N. Nesmeyanov Organcelementd Compounds InstituteMoscow

17. ●Kastyrrk P GA .A. Bngomolets Physiology Institute(U)Kiev

18. L@maa EChemicaf and Biological Physics fnstitute(E)Taflin

19. tSkrrktchev V PM.V, Lomonosov State UniversityA.N. Belozerski Lahnmtory of Molecular Biology and Binorgartic

ChemistryMoscow

A

4,575

4,401

4,268

4,181

4,082

3,980

3,326

3,290

3,177

3,140

2,777

2,626

2,432

2,389

2,188

I ,997

1,924

1,887

2,681

B

270

129

101

78

113

20

329

624

490

123

53

617

220

548

253

226

55

72

135

c

16.9

34.1

42.3

53.6

36.1

199.0

10.0

5.3

6.5

25.5

52.4

4.3

11.1

4,4

8.6

88.4

35.0

26.2

19,8

D

248

14

303

64

286

576

241

263

52

69

329

25

110

116

210

375

247

102

123

206

20. Strrrchkov Y TAN. Nesmeyanov Orgsnoelementsl Compounds Institute(A)Moscow

21. tSvmyaev R ASpsce ResearchInstitute(A)Moscow

22. MsrrtfrrekKM.V. Lomonosov State UniversityDepartment of ChemistryMoscow

23, Kiaelev A VM.V. Lomonosov State Universi&Depsrtmcrrt of ChemistryMoscow

24. Aft.vhufer B LB.P. Korrstmrtinov Nuclear Physics Institute(A)Lerringrsd

25. *Reutov O AM.V. Lomonosov Stste UniversityDepartmentof ChemistryMoscow

26. “Zeldovich Y BInstitute of Physics Problems(A)Moscow

27. Bergefson L DCardiology Rexarch Center(M)Moscow

28. *Kabanov V AA. V. Topchiev Petrochemical Synthesis Instimte(A)Moscow

29. SImshkov A SND. Zelinskii Orgsnic Chemistry InstituteMoscow

30. Wrhafov P LInstitute of Protein Research(A)Pushchino+r-oka

31. ?Fradkin ESP. N. Lehedev Physics Institute(A)Moscow

32. ●Ba.vov N GP.N. IA&v Physics Institute(A)Moscow

33. ●Ivsmov V TM. M. Shemyakin Biuorganic Chemistry lrrstitutc(A)Moscow

34. Belov N VM V. Lomonosov State UniversityDepartment of PhysicsMoscow

35. tLarkisr A 1L.D. Landsu Tlvaretid Physics InstituteMoscow

36. NovikOV V ATheoretical srrd Experimental Physics Irrs[itute(A)Moscow

37. *Razuvaev G AN .1. Imbachevstil Stste UniversityChemical Research fnstituteGorki

38. Aronov A GB.P. Konstantinov Nuclear Physics InstituteGatchma

39. SPksyrr V IPhysical Chemistry Institute(A)Moscow

40. tTsvetkov V Nfnstitute of Macromolecular CompmmdsLerrinarsd

3,303

1,877

1.842

1,763

1,813

1,733

1,732

1,708

1,622

1,597

i,59a

1,652

1,544

1,478

1,475

1,47s

1,463

1,454

1,449

1,397

1,367

464

35

118

182

36

206

91

176

224

171

61

76

199

90

409

55

56

220

54

293

143

7.1

53.6

15.6

64.6

50.4

8.4

19,0

66.5

7.2

9.3

26.1

21.7

7.8

i6.4

3.6

26.8

26.1

52.1

26.8

4.g

9.6

24

87

208

178

393

48

952

64

51

38

218

388

316

23

45

23

62

85

45

%

185

207

41,

42.

43.

44.

45,

46.

47,

48.

49.

50.

51.

52.

53.

54.

55.

56.

57.

50.

59.

60.

61.

SSrkfovskii B IA,F. Ioffe PhysicaJ Technical Institute(A)Leningrad

●Bsryev A AInstitute of MoleculaJ BiologyMnacow

●Goldarrskii V IChernicaf Physics Irrstitute(A)MoscowZmnolndcfdkov A BL.D. Landau Tfwxeticat Physics hrstitute(A)Moscow

tPetrov A APhysical Tecbnicrd hMiNt@A)MoscowMsgi MInstitute of Chemistry arrd Biological Physics(E)TaMn

●Pfate N AM. V. Lomonosov State UniversityDepartment of ChemistryMoscow

tBrmfdo F VGeneral Physics hrstinrts(A)MoscowShrrrysk E VNovosibirsk Nuclear Physics Institute(A)NovusiblrakKriahtaf O A

A.A. Bogomoleta Physiology Institute(U)Kiev

tBystrov V FM .M. Shemyakin Bioorganic Chemistry fnstitute(A)MoscowKuamhr VAChemical Physics fnatihrte(A)MoscowLhnchev L AM.V. Lnmonoaov State UniversityA ,N. Belozerskii Laboratory of Molecular Biology arrd B&mgarric

ChemistryMoscowAkhrem A Afnstitrrte of Biorrrganic Cherrristry(B)MinskMhrkirs VIRostov Ststc UniversityPhysics and Organic Chemistry Resrarch InstituteRostov

%rgdeev R ZSpace Research fnstihrte(A)MoscowLkakayev V VNovoaihirsk Medical fnstitrrteNovosibirskSlmvrdov L AInstitute of Crysodlography(A)MoacuwPetrovskif P VA .N, Nesmeyarrov Organoclementaf Compmrnda InstituteMoscowEfroa A LA. F. Ioffe Physical Tedrnicaf Institute(A)LeningradDrrdtriev B AN, F, Ganrafeya Epidemiology and Microbiology fnstitute(M)Moscow

1,347 51 26.4 131

1,338 77 17.4 14

1,309 136 9.6 167

1,295 38 34.1 188

1,280 283 4.5 47

1,251 40 31.3 21

1,220 131 9.3 108

1,197 137 g.7 121

1,1% 40 30.0 232

1,192 30 40.0 35

1,185 55 21.5 76

1,181 148 8.0 58

1,179 54 21.8 34

1,170

,170

,168

,149

1,141

1,135

1,119

1,117

213

198

119

22

181

137

57

89

5.5

5.9

9.13

52.2

6.3

8.3

19,6

12,6

68

66

117

6

17

0

94

29

.-

208

62.

63,

64.

65.

66.

67.

68,

69,

70,

71.

72.

73.

74.

75,

76,

7-I

78.

79,

80.

81.

82.

*Gorkov L PL.D. Lmrdau Themeticsl Physics Institute(A)Moscew5alavin A AL.D. Lsndsu llrcoreticsl Physics Institute(A)MoscowLipatov Y SInstituteof the Chemistryof MacromolecularCompounds(U)Kiev

Wakharov V EL.D. larrdsu llreoreticxdPhysics Institute(A)MoxxrwRyskov A PMolecular Biology Institute(A)MoscnwShrrvsdovV AIrrstitoteof Seii Scienee snd Photnsyrrthesis(A)Pushchinc-on-okaTseytlhr A A

P.N. L&aim Physics Institute(A)MnscowNametkin N SA.V. To~hiyev PetrochemicalSynthesis Institute(A)MoscowLevrrrtyuk A PA.V. Shubnikova Crystrdlography brsrimte(A)MnscowNefedov V IN.S. Kumakov Genersl mrd Inrrrganic Chemistry hrstitute(A)MoscowSkryabin K GMolecrdsrBiology Institute(A)MoscowDavankov V AA. N. Nesmeysnov OrgarmelementalCompoundsInstitute(A)MoscowShfbaev V PM.V. Lomonosov State UniversityDepartment of ChemistryMoscnwZbdarrov V MD. I. Ivsnovskii Virology Institute(M)Mescew

Klimov v vA.N. Bskh Biochemistry brstitute(A)MosmwLutsetrko I FM.V. fmmonosov State UniversityDepsrlment of ChemistryMoscowAbdofaev N G

M.M. ShemyakinBieorgsnk ChemistryInstitute(A)MoscewKumakbov M A

M.V. Lomonosov State UniversityInstituteof Nuclear PhysicsMoscowVolosfdrrM BTheoreticalsrrdExperimental Physics hrstituteMoscowYerrrmkOv Y 1Institute of CatalysisNovosibirskOrIov S NCentrsl Research I..Aurs:oryMinim-y of Public Hesltb USSRMescow

1,116

1,114

1,112

1,109

1,090

~,089

1,087

1,082

1,072

1,063

1,062

1,040

1,039

1,035

1,021

1,001

997

990

987

982

969

54

18

196

61

51

54

41

125

73

105

40

84

108

138

67

191

37

50

44

95

67

20.7

61.9

5.7

18.1

21.4

20.2

26.5

8.7

14.7

10.1

26.6

12.4

9.6

7.5

15.2

5.2

27.0

19.8

22.4

10,3

14.5

111

235

134

275

4

4

51

0

59

70

9

34

53

34

55

20

12

35

62

36

43

209

83.

S4.

85.

86.

87.

88.

89.

90.

91.

92.

93.

94.

95.

96,

97,

98.

99.

100,

(A) =(M) =(E) =

Boreakov G KInstitute of Catalysis(A)Novosibirsk

PnatrmvY vCemral Research LaboratoryMinistry of Public Hcaltb USSRMoscow

●Spirfn A SInstitute of Protein Research(A)Pushchino-on-Oka

*Knorre D GInstitute of Bionrganic Chemistry(A)NovosibirskPtitayrr O BInstitute of Prutein Research(A)Pushcbino-on-Oka

*Cfsazov E IMoscow Cardiology CenterMoscowKsschesnov V ASerpukhov High Energy Physics fnstitute%SpukhovFeigina M YM.M. Shemyakin Institute of Bioorganic Chemistry(A)MoscowOsifxw O ARostov Onn UniversityPhysical and Organic Chemistry fnstituteRostov OmrSokofov v IA.N. Nesmeyanov Orgarmelementaf Compounds fnsthute(A)MoscowShafmra N IShtemherg Astronomy fnstituteMoscowMafsarov G NSpectroscopy Institute(A)TroitakBrandt N BM V. Lcmmnoaov State UniversityDepartment of PhysicsMoscowSaka VACardiovascular Surge~ Institute(M)MmcowRubin A BM. V. Immonosov State UniversityDepartment of BiophysicsMoscow.%moaon AInstitute of Chcmicaf Physics and Biophysics(E)TsllinKarden A DM. V. fmmonosov State UniversityA. N. Belozerstii Laboratory of Molecular B[ology and

Bioorgarric ChemistryMoscowFrankkmnenetakff M DInstitute of Molecular GeneticsMoscow

Academy of SciencesAcademy of Medical SAencesAcademv of Sciences EsSSR

(U) = Academ~ of Sciences UkSSR(B) = Academy of Sciences BeSSR

964

957

952

937

932

932

925

924

923

919

916

908

903

902

902

897

897

880

109

47

60

76

57

42

82

23

178

117

14

41

124

51

125

21

33

32

8.8

20.4

15.9

12.3

16.4

22,2

11.3

40.2

5.2

7.9

65.4

22.1

7.3

17.7

7.2

42.7

27.0

27.5

46

79

65

34

48

118

0

0

31

443

77

I

115

33

13

31

2

44

210

cipliie determinations are, for the most part,made solely by institutional affiliation; how-ever, if the discipline could not be ascer-tained by affiliation, the journals in whichthe scientist published were examined tohelp us.

Among the 35 physicists listed, 10 areacademy members: corresponding membersFedor V. Bunkin, Etlm S. Fradkin, AnatoliI. Larkin, Aleksander M. Polyakov, andVladimir E. Zakharov; and academiciansNikolai G. Basov, Vitalii I. Goldanskii,Lev P. Gorkov, Nobelist Aleksander M.Prokhorov, and the late Zeldovich. All workat institutions based in Moscow. Nonacad-emy members overwhelmingly had institu-tional affiliations in Moscow as well (16),but there was representation from othercities as well—Leningrad (3), Tallin (2),Gatchina (l), Novosibirsk (1), Serpnkhov(l), and Troitsk (l).

Medvedev believes the prominence of So-viet physicists in our list would be even moreevident had nuclear scientists been able topublish their results abroad. Furthermore,he points out that many prominent figuresworking in nuclear physics (as well as othersubjects that are defense-linked) are not evenallowed to publish in Soviet journals (un-doubtedly comparable statements could bemade about Western defense-linked re-searchers):

Even names of some great Soviet sci-entists are never mentiom3Mike academi-cian Sergei P. Korolev (space technology),who was anonymous before he died.Others, like the Iate academicianV, Legasov (or academician Evgeny P.Velildmv, now director of the I. KurchatovInstitute in Moscow) have published veryfew papers, because they mostfy prepare“closed” repxta.... The late academicianAndrei D. Sakharov is hardly known asa nuclear scientist if you read thejournais.3}

Of the 32 life scientists in Table 1, the fourmost-cited researchers are members of theacademy. They are biochemist Ovchin-nikov, now deceased; molecular biologistGeorgi P. Georgiev, a Citation Classic”

commentator;s~ physiologist Platen G.Kostyuk; and corresponding member andbiochemist Vladimir P. Sktdachev. Furtherdown the list, we find academicians VadimT. Ivanov (biochemistry); Aleksander A.Bayev (molecular biology); Aleksander S.Spirin (molectdar biology), also a CirationClassic commentator;s6 D. G. Knorre(biochemistry); Evgeny 1. Chazov (physi-ology); and corresponding members PyotrL. Privalov (biophysics and polymers) andVladimir F. Bystrov (biophysics). Ivanov,Bayev, Bystrov, Chazov, Georgiev, andSIndachev work in Moscow; Kostyuk inKiev; Knorre in Novosibirsk; and Privalovand Spirin in Pnshchino-on-Oka. Of theother 21 life scientists, 16 work in researchcenters in Moscow, 2 in Pushchino-on-Oka,and 1each in Kiev, Minsk, and Novosibirsk.

Of the 30 chemists, 12 are academy mem-bers: corresponding members Mikhail G.Voronkov, Anatoli A. Petrov, Arkadiy N.Pudovik, and V.N. Tsvetkov; and academi-cians Viktor A. Kabanov, Nikolai K.Kochetkov, V.V. Korshak, the late Nesmey-anov, Nikolai A. Plate, Georgi A. Razu-vaev, Oleg A. Reutov, and Nikolai S.Zefirov. Tsvetkov works in Leningrad,Voronkov in Irkutsk, Pudovik in Kaz.an,andRazuvaev in Gorki, while the others haveMoscow addresses. The other chemists inour most-cited list are located at institutionsin the following cities: Moscow (11), No-vosibirsk and Rostov-on-Don (2 each), andKiev, Tallin, and Troitsk (1 each).

The three space-science researchers weidentified are corresponding memlxx RashidA. Sunyaev, academician Roald Z. Sagdeev,and N .1. Shakura. All have Moscow ad-dresses, Sagdeev has been instrumental inthe ongoing efforts to restructure the acad-emy, and his views appear later in this essay.

Overall, the institutional affiliations of thetop 100 Soviet researchers reveal that 71 aresituated in Moscow, 4 each in Leningrad,Novosibirsk, and Pushchino-n-Oka, and 3apiece in Kiev and Tallin. Figure 1 is a mapof the USSR showing all cities that publishedat least 250 papers in 1989. The number ofpapers px city is given below the map. In1989 the SC1covered over 3,200 journals,

211

F-e 1: Soviet cities that generated 2S0 or more publications in 1%9. A =city in which research was conducted.

B =number of papers published in 1989.

PMshchlno

Lvov

Odesw

-uA B

Baku 263Cbernugolovka 409Omretsk 413Dubm 289Erevan 255Gorki 327Irkutsk 429Ka2an 374Kharkov 884Kiev 3,106Leningrad 3,414Lvov 346

of which 127 were Soviet journals in Rus-sian or in English translation.

Factors Affecting Soviet CitationCounts

While reviewing this essay, Medvedevnoticed that most of the citations to the ma-jority of the authors in our list are to Sovietpublications, and very few are from US orWestern journals. Medvedev rdso noted thatthe most-cited and most-prolific authors—Letokhov and Voronkov-have significantpercentages of self-citations. Medvedev pmvialed some further insights as to why someof the names possibly appeared on our list:

A

MinskMoscowNovosibirskOdessaPushchino-on-OkaRigaRostov-on-DonSverdkovskTashkentTbilisiTomskUfaVladivostok

B

99514,044

1,265326316274325678420292491261321

In the USSR it is nearly compulsory tocite so-called “classics” and scientistswho are very influential. For example,Evgeny 1. Chazov was also a minister ofhealth of the USSR (he was dismissed inearly April). [M]any references in 1988were due to his ministerial position . . . .[For example], even Chazov’s short in-terview in the generaf media tabloidArgume~ i Fatty is included among hislist of works, [although it is not a researcharticle]. This [instance] is due to the facthe was the minister of health, not txxauseof his research achievements. ~n 1985Chazov, along with the American BernardLown, aecepkxt the Nobel Peace Prixe onbehalf of the Intemationaf Physicians forthe Prevention of Nuclear War.]

Furthermore, some scientists receivepreferential citation treafment in the USSR

212

because they are editors-in-chief of cer-tain journals. [For example], Vladiir P.Skulachev [is] editor of Biokhimiya, andthe late professor V. M. Zhdanov, formereditor of Voprosy Viru.rologii,.., [And itis a] Soviet rufe that publication of a sci-entific paper [is] allowed only if it is offi-cially presented by the institute dmector.Without a formal letter from the director,the paper will not even be considered bySoviet scientific journals. [Thus], the di-rectors and their deputies are ensconcedin privileged positions ... .31

The Highest Impact Soviet Wlentists AreNot Necessarily the Most Prolific

The highest impact Soviet atrthor duringthe 15-year span, 1973-1988, is nuclearphysicist Polyakov, art academy correspond-ing member. His 20 papers received about4,0(Kl citations for art average of 2(KIcita-tions per paper. Crystallographer N.V,Belov has the lowest impact (3.6) of the 100scientists listed. Their average impact is23.3. The cited average for academy mem-bers is 24.6. However, if one factors outPolyakov’s’ ‘superstar” citation number, theimpact for academy members is 19.4. AfterPolyakov, the next six scientists with thehighest impact are: the late Nesmeyanov(88.4); cardiologist L.D. Bergelson (66.5);astronomer Shakura (65.4); physicist A.V.Kiselev (64.6); and physicist Vainshtein andspace scientist Sunyaev (53.6 each).

The most-prolific authors in Table 1 arephysicists and chernists-Vororrkov, with624 papers; Korshak (617); Pudovik (548);Prokhorov (490); Y .T. Struchkov (464);Belov (409); and Kochetkov (329). By theway, in a study of the highest cited Sovietscientists that appeared in I%e Sciersfist@,it was erroneously reported that Kochetkovwas deceased.3T We received letters fromboth Goldanskii and Kochetkov himself in-forming us of this fact,qg.qg (Apparently,Kochetkov was confused with a K.A. Ko-cheshkov, who died 12 years ago.)

Fifty-three of the scientists in Table 1 au-thored 100 papers or less that were cited atleast once, while 30 authored 101 to 200 pa-pers. Seventeen authored more than 200

papers, 11 of whom are academy members.

Most of these papers included one or morecoauthors.

Physics Predominance: A Sign of SovietMilitarism?

Physics has been an area of science inwhich the USSR has been known to conductworld-class research for over 50 years. So-viet physicists are respected, irttluentird,andhave been at the forefront of world sciencefor many decades. The data presented herecorroborate this: of the lfXlmost-cited sci-entists, 35 are physicists. Typically, life-sci-ences researchers and publications tend todominate undifferentiated citation lists. Thereverse has been the case in the USSR.

We asked Medvedev to comment on this.He suggests that in the past the SovietUnion’s military establishment focused thenation’s scientific efforts on physics-basedprojects—such as the development of nu-:lear weapons:

Physics received top priority in the So-viet Union when Stalin spent most mblesto create the atomic bomb. As a conw-quence, physics received favored treat-ment and unfimited govermnentd support,and physicists were able to develop any-thing they liked. Physicists also had themost fnnds of any branch of Sovietscience.

They were also spared the same type ofidczrlogically motivated interference whichhad such a disastrous impact on biology(the Trofirn Lysenko affair), on chemistry(the rejection of Linus Pauling’s theories),and cybernetics,

Since World War II, the majority of theelected presidents of the Academy of Sci-ences have been [nuclear] physicists.[Since] the academy was dominated byphysicists, [they became] the privilegedelite.

But tcday, I don’t think Soviet physicistshave leading positions in world science asthey did in the 1950s and 1960s-essen-tially becau~ of the problems of obtain-ing modem computers. flue to this, Sovietprogress in physics today is much moremodest than in the past.*

According to Nobelist Roafd Hoffrnam,Department of Chemistry, Come]] Univer-

213

sity, militarism is onfy one reason for thedominance of physics in Soviet science. Hesuggests another major factor is the tradi-tion of highly regarded scientists in Russianhistory: “Role models are very importantin Soviet (and Russian) society. Three greatphysicists—Landau, Ilya I. Frenkel, andPyotr Kapitza-shapexi Soviet science, notonfy physics, but also guided [Soviet] youthto physics. [These men’s] eminence andprestige preaiued the World War 11period.’ ’41

Soviet excellence in physics is borne outwhen one looks at the Nobel Prizes. Of the10 Nobel Prizes that have been awarded toSoviet scientists, 7 have been in physics. The1958 prize was awarded to Ilya M. Frank,Igor E. Tamm, and Pavel A. Cherenkov.Landau won in 1%2 for his work in the fieldof condensed matter, especially liquidhelium. And Basov and Prokhorov with theAmerican Charles Townes won in 1964.

(Prokhorov is ranked ninth on the list ofmost-cited Soviet scientists in Table 1.)Pyotr Kapitza, who shared the 1978 Nobelphysics award with Americans Amo Pen-zias and Robert Wilson, was recognized forhis inventions and discoveries in low-tem-perature physics.

An interesting trend among Soviet physicsNobelists is that the 1958 and 1964 awardswent to activity relating to lasers. Tamm andFrank found an explanation for why someliquids fluoresced when irradiated by gam-ma rays, a phenomenon discovered by Che-renkov. This discovery, which later provedimportant for laser technology, was recog-nized by the 1958 prize. AZ Prokhorov,Basov, and Townes’s efforts dealt with thedevelopment of lasers and won the 1964award. 43 The top-cited Soviet scientist in

1S1’s Science Iw”icatom fde—Letokhov—is a pioneer in the field of laser spectrosco-

py.

Conclusion

In concluding the first part of this essayon Soviet science, it is worth noting a re-cent interview by academician Sagdeev,former director of the Space Research In-stitute, Moscow, who gave an assessmentof the USSR Academy of Sciences. Accord-ing to Sagdeev the academy has become lit-tle more than a rubber stamp for huge, na-tional-prestige projects after decades of cmt-trol by an aging bureaucracy. Onfy in 1988were elections for the top academy postsrevamped, and age caps have been placedon active members. u

Sagdeev further asserts that perestroikhas come late to the academy and greaterefforts will be required for meaningful re-structuring. He said: “The academy was toosleepy in the beginning .. . . It began to over-haul itself only as a result of demands fromthe public and from individual scientists . . . .As long as top officials [of the academy] arenominated by the [Communist] party orthrough party bosses like Yegor Ligachev,perestroika in the academy will be aphantom.’ ’44

In Parl 2, we will examine the most-citedpapers, institutes, research fronts, and jour-nals.

*****

My thanks to C.J. Fiscus and PeterPesavento for their help in the preparationof this essay.

a:* ,s,

REFERENCES

1. Clinea F X. Soviet leaders agree to surrender Communist party monopoly on pnwer. New York 7ime$8 February IWO, p. AI; AlO.

2, Rnotlt W. AAAS mex?ting: science smorgasbord with snow. Science 239:971-2, 1988.3. seltzer R J. Soviet scientists detail reforms under perestroika. Chem. Eng. News 66(8):5-6,

22 February 1988.4. -—--—--- Perestroika and glasnost begin to transform science in U.S.S.R. Chem. .Eng. News

66(51):31-3, 19 December 1988.

214

5. Sweet W. Michigan team to join in first experimentat Soviet accelerator. Phys. Tmfoy 42(8):58,August 1989.

6. Buderi R. US-Soviet earthquake collaboration. Nature 340:583, 1989.7. Palca J. US rmd Soviet rrcademicians meet in Washington, Narure 336:702, 1988,8. Covmdt C. New U. S. LSnviet space agreenrents to aid shuttle, Mir medical research. ,4viaf. Week Space

Techrrd. 132(1):41, 1 January 1990.9, Anderaun G C. US joins Srwietventure. Nahere344(6264):280, 22 March 19$Q.

10, Levkov S. Kak my ne sletali na lunu (How we didn’t get to the muon). fzvemia 231:3, 18 August 1989.11. KamrmbJ L. S r.errrli na lunu i obramo (From Earth to mnmr and back). Poisk 12:7-8, July 1989,12. Wilford J N. Now, Sovieta acknowledge a mnmr race. New York Times 18 December 1989. p. Al; B7,13. Dickson D. Kyshtym ‘“afmostas bad as Chernobyl, ”New Sci. 124(1696/7):3-4, 23/30 December 1989.14, Trabalka J R, Auerbach S 1 & Eyrmm L D. Letter to editor, (The 1957 Soviet nuclear accident.)

Science 245:806, 1989,15. Andersmr G C. Soviet official admits that robots couldn’t handle Chernobylcleanup. J7reScienrisr

4(2):2; 23, 22 January 199U.16, L3ickaon D. Gorbachev lifts funds for civil R&D. New Sci. 124(1685):23, 7 October 1989,17. Yuafn M. Barrs no more. Sov, L@ 400(1): 12, January 1990.

18. Bioglasnost. .Ecorromisr-Lorrdon 3 14(7644): 100, 3 March 1990.19, Delaney L. Sergei P. Kapitza. VISION 4(2):3, August 1987. (Newsletter.)20. Garffeld E. Journal citation smdies. 51, Duwn tu the sea a8ain: probing the depths of marine biology

Iiteratore. Current Corrterus (19):3-13, 8 May 1989.21, ---—--—. br tribute to V. V. Nafirnov: Renaissance scholar and acientometriciarr par excellence. .LWay$

of an information scientisf. PfrifadelphIa1S1Press, 1983. Vol. 5, p. 417-27.22. Weinstein E. 1S1welcomes Soviet information scientist. h.ride 1S1 November 1989, p. 2-3.

(Newsletter.)23. Ssnafl H & GriffWrB C. The structureof scientific literatures I: identifying and graphing specialties.

Sri. Sfudies 4: I 7-40, 1974.24. Marahakova-Shai3cevich 1 V. System of dncument conrwctions based on references. Sci. Tech,h$or.

Serial VJNI’J76:3-8, 1973.25, Gorffeld E. HigNy cited articles. 20 articles from Russianjournals. Op. cir., 1977. Vol, 2. p. 374-7.26. -------- The 250 must-cited primary authors., 1961-1975. Parts 1 & 2. ibid., 1980. Vol. 3.

p, 326-47.27. Hottoway D. J@iew of “Letters nn Science” by P.L. Kapitaa. NJ’ Rev. Books 37(3):23-5,

1 March@W.28. Faddeev L D. Gpxstur anomrdy for the Gauss law. Phys. Left. B 145:81-4, 1984.29. Garfield E. Idiosyncrasies and errors, or the terrible tbhrgs juurrrals do to us. op. cit., 1984.

Vol. 6. p. 6-12,30. -----—-. Is yuur journal “up front” with your address? Or, the saga of the incomplete address.

Parta 1 & 2. Ibid. p. 338-53.31. Medvadev Z A. Peraunalcommunication.20 April 1990.32. Gtileld E. Will perestroikaopen Suviet science’s dmra to the English language?Jhe Sciem”sl4(5):18,

5 March 1990.33. Academy of Sciences of the U, S.S.R. Encydopuedia Bn”mnrrica. Chicago, IL: Encyclopedia Britannica,

1985. Vol. 1. p. 50-1.34. Gurtield E. The 1,000 most-cited contemporary authors. Parts 2A & 3. Essays of an irrjiirmafiorr

scientist. Phfladephti. 1S1 Press, 1983. Vol. 5. p. 428-36; 591-606.35, Ger@ev G P. Citation Classic. Commentary on Narure 2C0 1291-4, 1%3. Currenf Corrrents/LJJe

Sciences 29(5 1-52):25, 22-29 December 1986.36. Spk4rr A S. Citation Classic. Commentary on BiokhimiW (USSR) 23:656-62, 1958.

Current Conterrtslfife Sciences 29(21):21, 26 May 1986.37. Pendlebucy D. Pbysica standa out as foremost field in Soviet science. J?re .$cierttisf 4(4):18; 23,

19 February 1990.38. Grddartakii V I. Perwnal communication. 1 March 1990.39, Kucbetkov N K. Peramraf communication. March 1990.40. Meefvadev Z A. PersonaJ cmrummication. 9 March IWO.41. Hoffmann R. Personal communication. 2 May 19W.42. Medvedev Z A. Soviet science. New York Norton, 1978. p. 38.43. Knorre Y. He made the iaaer. Sq”. USSR 9(1):6-18; 108, 1990.

44. Russian science. Rccketa intu ploughshares. Economist-L.zmdon 3 14(7647): 132, 24 March 1990.

215