  Citation networks have been widely used to study the evolution of science
through the lenses of the underlying patterns of knowledge flows among academic
papers, authors, research sub-fields, and scientific journals. Here we focus on
citation networks to cast light on the salience of homophily, namely the
principle that similarity breeds connection, for knowledge transfer between
papers. To this end, we assess the degree to which citations tend to occur
between papers that are concerned with seemingly related topics or research
problems. Drawing on a large data set of articles published in the journals of
the American Physical Society between 1893 and 2009, we propose a novel method
for measuring the similarity between articles through the statistical
validation of the overlap between their bibliographies. Results suggest that
the probability of a citation made by one article to another is indeed an
increasing function of the similarity between the two articles. Our study also
enables us to uncover missing citations between pairs of highly related
articles, and may thus help identify barriers to effective knowledge flows. By
quantifying the proportion of missing citations, we conduct a comparative
assessment of distinct journals and research sub-fields in terms of their
ability to facilitate or impede the dissemination of knowledge. Findings
indicate that knowledge transfer seems to be more effectively facilitated by
journals of wide visibility, such as Physical Review Letters, than by
lower-impact ones. Our study has important implications for authors, editors
and reviewers of scientific journals, as well as public preprint repositories,
as it provides a procedure for recommending relevant yet missing references and
properly integrating bibliographies of papers.
