There's a wealth of material lodged at the AES from the original era on materials science of vinyl, including vinyl compounds, pressing and challenges in manufacture; curves, RIAA, the introduction of quadraphonic records; measurements of frequency response and the like. Much of this research was funded by companies like RCA who had good commercial reasons for doing so. Others, like Western Electric, are long gone.
You'll need to become a member of the AES to access the archive, which is digitally accessible. Makes for some interesting reading.
I suspect, once LP was long in the tooth and replaced by CD as mainstream format, there was no need to do any "science"-- it was considered a dead letter commercially.
The revival of the LP in mainstream consciousness is not necessarily about state of the art, but price point and value. Who would fund such research and for what purpose? The big record companies are a shadow of what they once were-- like Hollywood studios, they license content rather than create and manufacture the product themselves.
The state of the art endeavors in LP playback are small shops for the most part, aren't they? Panasonic is the biggest one who comes to mind and it's probably a tiny part of their business. Have they published papers on the rebooted SP 10?
I suspect a lot of the advances since the heyday of vinyl playback are in areas like materials science and isolation (where there should be some scientific substantiation for claims, e.g. Minus K, whose business is not strictly audio). But, a lot of the science was established years ago so improvements are likely in a better execution, higher grade bearings, lower noise motor systems, all of which should be measurable.
Where will that leave you? Most of the more recherché equipment isn't bought on specs. If a turntable can't keep speed, that's something that a reviewer would note, isn't it? If there is motor noise, that's measurable and also probably evident to the ear. I'm not suggesting that there is no innovation, but an awful lot of LP playback isn't new science is it? And is science going to explain why a Lyra cartridge sounds different than an Airtight than a Koetsu? I doubt it. (Airtight claim that there are advantages to extremely low impedance and also probably to some of the materials they use, but I didn't buy those cartridges based on such claims or specs, I bought them because I liked what I heard). I'm not sure that buying at the top level requires scientific validation and the more modestly priced stuff- things like reliability and long term in the field usage probably sold quite a few of those Technics 1200s, then and now.
