Yeah, some of the measures were curious, such as unique keywords per 10,000 papers. It isn't clear to me what we should expect if science was doing fine -- more

Yeah, some of the measures were curious, such as unique keywords per 10,000 papers. It isn't clear to me what we should expect if science was doing fine -- more unique keywords total, yes, but per 10,000 papers? Why? In general, I think the paper needs a stronger argument about what a null hypothesis should be and why that is violated.