A nearly universal trend in science today is the prominence of ever-increasing collaborative teams. Hence, identifying the relative credit due to each collaborator of published studies is of high significance. Although numerous methods have been employed to address this issue, allocating credit to all co-authors of new papers remains challenging. To address this cold-start issue, we introduce a credit allocation algorithm based on the co-citing network that captures the co-authors’ shared credit of a multi-authored publication. Using the American Physical Society publication data, we validate the method by examining papers by Nobel laureates. Accordingly, we perform many experiments to demonstrate that the proposed method can be implemented on academic papers in any period after publication with a significantly higher degree of accuracy and robustness than the existing algorithms applied to new papers. This method enables us to explore the universal credit evolution pattern of scientific elites. Importantly, by testing the relation between an author's credit and authorship byline, we observe that the first authors of papers are currently assigned less credit than in the early days with respect to physics. With collaboration and a large team set to dominate the agenda of the current science system, our study provides a more effective method for allocating early credit to co-authors of a paper, which may be beneficial to various academic activities, including faculty hiring, funding, and promotion decisions.

当今，科学领域几乎普遍的趋势是协作团队的不断壮大。因此，确定每个已发表研究合作者的相对信誉具有很高的意义。尽管已采用多种方法来解决此问题，但要为新论文的所有合著者分配功劳仍然具有挑战性。为了解决这个冷启动问题，我们引入了基于共同引用网络的学分分配算法，该算法捕获了多作者出版物的共同作者的共享学分。使用美国物理学会的出版物数据，我们通过检查诺贝尔奖获得者的论文来验证该方法。因此，我们进行了许多实验，证明了所提出的方法可以在发表后的任何时期在学术论文上实施，其准确性和鲁棒性要比应用于新论文的现有算法高得多。这种方法使我们能够探索科学精英的普遍信用演化模式。重要的是，通过测试作者的信誉和作者身份之间的关系，我们观察到，与物理学相比，第一批论文的当前作者分配的信用要少于早期。通过合作和庞大的团队来支配当前科学系统的议程，我们的研究为将早期学分分配给论文的共同作者提供了一种更有效的方法，这可能有益于各种学术活动，包括教师的聘用，资金，