Scientific novelty drives advances at the research frontier, yet it is also associated with heightened uncertainty and potential resistance from incumbent paradigms, leading to complex patterns of scientific impact. Prior studies have primarily ex-amined the relationship between a single dimension of novelty -- such as theoreti-cal, methodological, or results-based novelty -- and scientific impact. However, because scientific novelty is inherently multidimensional, focusing on isolated dimensions may obscure how different types of novelty jointly shape impact. Consequently, we know little about how combinations of novelty types influence scientific impact. To this end, we draw on a dataset of 15,322 articles published in Nature Communications. Using the DeepSeek-V3 model, we classify articles into three novelty dimensions based on the content of their Introduction sections: theoretical novelty, methodological novelty, and results-based novelty. These dimensions may coexist within the same article, forming distinct novelty configura-tions. Scientific impact is measured using five-year citation counts and indicators of whether an article belongs to the top 1% or top 10% highly cited papers. Descriptive results indicate that results-based novelty alone and the simultaneous presence of all three novelty types are the dominant configurations in the sample. Regression results further show that articles with results-based novelty only re-ceive significantly more citations and are more likely to rank among the top 1% and top 10% highly cited papers than articles exhibiting all three novelty types. These findings advance our understanding of how multidimensional novelty configurations shape knowledge diffusion.

翻译：科学新颖性驱动着研究前沿的进步，但同时也与高度不确定性和来自现有范式的潜在阻力相关，从而导致复杂的科学影响力模式。以往研究主要考察了单一维度新颖性——如理论新颖性、方法论新颖性或结果新颖性——与科学影响力之间的关系。然而，由于科学新颖性本质上是多维度的，仅关注孤立维度可能会掩盖不同类型新颖性如何共同塑造影响力。因此，我们对新颖性类型组合如何影响科学影响力知之甚少。为此，我们基于《自然·通讯》期刊上发表的15,322篇论文构成的数据集，利用DeepSeek-V3模型，根据论文引言部分的内容将其分为三个新颖性维度：理论新颖性、方法论新颖性和结果新颖性。这些维度可能在同篇论文中并存，形成不同的新颖性构型。科学影响力通过五年引用次数以及论文是否属于前1%或前10%高被引论文的指标来测量。描述性结果显示，仅具备结果新颖性以及同时具备所有三种新颖性类型是样本中的主导构型。回归结果进一步表明，与同时具备所有三种新颖性类型的论文相比，仅具备结果新颖性的论文获得了显著更多的引用，且更有可能跻身前1%和前10%高被引论文之列。这些发现深化了我们对多维新颖性构型如何塑造知识扩散的理解。