There have been a couple efforts I know of to “quantify” science progress in general. In one study[0], physicists, chemists and medical researchers were asked t

There have been a couple efforts I know of to “quantify” science progress in general. In one study[0], physicists, chemists and medical researchers were asked to rate the important of different Nobel-prize-winning discoveries in their field since the prize was established. The results generally showed that discoveries are getting harder to make, where “harder” is indicated by the age of the discoverer and the number of participants in the process. One important factor that I feel like is overlooked here is that some discoveries are less likely to be appreciated immediately, largely because their impact is not yet fully felt. Also some form of anti-recency bias may be at play here, in that new results that are still somewhat under debate are less likely to be deemed “important” than older, established discoveries. 0: https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2018/11/diminishing-returns-science/575665/ https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2018/11/diminish...