arXiv's cs domain, driven by cs.LG/cs.CV/cs.CL, has grown markedly faster than its math domain since the early 2010s, per arXiv's own aggregate submission statistics

linnainmaacitation-analysisbibliometricsfield-growtharxiv-growthnguyen-egerembedding-bridge

arXiv's own submission-rate statistics page (data through 2021, last updated 3 January 2022) reports that its cs domain's growth rate overtook its math domain's over almost exactly the window Nguyen & Eger study: cs "ramp[ed] up in 2007, grew to exceed the hep rate in calendar year 2012, continued on a very fast growth rate 2011-2015, and on an even faster growth rate since 2015 (driven largely by the computer vision, machine learning, and computational linguistics communities)," while math's own rapid growth phase dates to 2002. By 2021 cs's yearly submission share (33.6%) had passed math's (19.6%) even though math's cumulative 1991–2021 share (22.0%) still exceeded cs's (16.3%) — a recent, widening crossover, not a static gap. The page states plainly: "cs has been growing faster than the other two domains since the early 2010s."

Linnainmaa's own field — numerical analysis / automatic differentiation — sits inside math as arXiv aggregates it, a category this page does not break out from math as a whole. It is therefore not the field-specific baseline that Nguyen & Eger's paper is shown to lack. What it does supply, at Tier 1, is directional context for why no such baseline would be expected to resemble Nguyen & Eger's 20–32× AI-subfield figures: cs.LG, cs.CV and cs.CL are named on this page as the fastest-growing slice of arXiv's fastest-growing domain, while math as a whole grew markedly slower over the same years. This suggests the shortfall already measured between Linnainmaa's ≈4.1× citation-rate growth and Nguyen & Eger's 20–32× figures may not need an alternative mechanism — his own field's growth rate may simply never have been in that range.