The past half-century has seen a dramatic increase in the scale and complexity of scientific research, to which researchers have responded by dedicating more time to education and training, narrowing their areas of specialization, and collaborating in larger teams. A widely held view is that such collaborations, by fostering specialization and encouraging novel combinations of ideas, accelerate scientific innovation. However, recent research challenges this notion, suggesting that small teams and solo researchers consistently disrupt science and technology with fresh ideas and opportunities, while larger teams tend to refine existing ones. This study, along with other relevant research, has garnered attention for challenging the zeitgeist of our time that views collaboration as the inevitable path forward in scientific and technological advancement. Yet, few studies have re-evaluated its central finding: the innovative advantage of small teams over large ones, using alternative measures. This study explores innovation by identifying papers proposing new scientific concepts and patents introducing new technology codes. We analyzed 88 million research articles spanning from 1800 to 2020 and 7 million patent applications from 1976 to 2020 worldwide. Our findings confirm that while large teams contribute to development, small teams play a critical role in innovation by propelling fresh, original ideas in science and technology.

翻译：过去半个世纪，科学研究的规模和复杂性急剧增加，研究者通过投入更多时间于教育和培训、缩小专业领域范围以及组建更大团队来应对这一趋势。一种普遍观点认为，这种通过促进专业化和鼓励思想新颖组合的合作形式，加速了科学创新。然而，近期研究对此提出质疑，表明小团队和独立研究者持续以新思想和新机遇颠覆科技领域，而大团队则更倾向于完善现有成果。这项研究及其他相关成果因挑战了当代将合作视为科技发展必由之路的主流思潮而受到关注。但少有研究采用替代性指标重新评估其核心结论——小团队相较于大团队的创新优势。本研究通过识别提出新科学概念的论文和引入新技术代码的专利来探索创新。我们分析了全球1800至2020年间的8800万篇研究论文及1976至2020年间的700万项专利申请。研究结果证实，尽管大团队有助于科技发展，但小团队通过推动原创性新思想在科技创新中发挥关键作用。