The impact and originality are two critical dimensions for evaluating scientific publications, measured by citation and disruption metrics respectively. Despite the extensive effort made to understand the statistical properties and evolution of each of these metrics, the relations between the two remain unclear. In this paper, we study the evolution during last 70 years of the correlation between scientific papers' citation and disruption, finding surprisingly a decreasing trend from positive to negative correlations over the years. Consequently, during the years, there are fewer and fewer disruptive works among the highly cited papers. These results suggest that highly disruptive studies nowadays attract less attention from the scientific community. The analysis on papers' references supports this trend, showing that papers citing older references, less popular references and diverse references become to have less citations. Possible explanations for the less attention phenomenon could be due to the increasing information overload in science, and citations become more and more prominent for impact. This is supported by the evidence that research fields with more papers have a more negative correlation between citation and disruption. Finally, we show the generality of our findings by analyzing and comparing six disciplines.

翻译：影响力与原创性是评价科学论文的两个关键维度，分别通过被引次数和颠覆性指标进行衡量。尽管已有大量研究致力于理解这两个指标的统计特性及演变规律，但二者之间的关系仍不明确。本文通过分析过去70年中科学论文被引次数与颠覆性之间相关性的演变趋势，意外发现两者的相关性从正相关逐渐转变为负相关。因此，近年来高被引论文中的颠覆性研究越来越少。这一结果表明，当今科学界对高颠覆性研究的关注度正在下降。对论文参考文献的分析进一步印证了这一趋势：引用更陈旧、更冷门及更多元参考文献的论文，其被引次数逐渐减少。造成这一现象的可能原因包括科学领域日益严重的信息过载，以及被引次数作为影响力指标的重要性日益凸显，这在论文数量较多的研究领域中，颠覆性与被引次数的负相关性更强这一事实中得到验证。最后，通过对六大学科领域的比较分析，我们证实了上述发现具有普遍性。