Timeline for Why can't we just use platforms such as arXiv for proper peer-reviewed publishing?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
6 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 6, 2021 at 14:34 | comment | added | mfg | In a software as a service world, one could organise peer reviews via EasyChair, forward papers to arXiv (like eptcs.org), upload supplemental materials to zenodo.org, code to bitbucket, and allow post-publication discussions on pubpeer. And arXiv or someone else could provide an interface that collects and distributes the data. Funding for such a project should be acquirable. | |
| Sep 6, 2021 at 14:27 | comment | added | mfg | @TerryLoring Absolutely, arXiv would need a bunch of further features, such as support for supplemental material (videos, code, data) and further meta-data. I like zenodo.org in this regard. And the possibility to add comments/post-pub peer reviews. I like pubpeer.org in that regard. Overall, I don't think that the required implementation of such features in arXiv would be a showstopper for the suggested change/solutions. arXiv seems to be on its way to widen its applicability for Diamond OA journals and the like. | |
| Sep 5, 2021 at 3:13 | history | edited | Terry Loring | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 39 characters in body
|
| Sep 5, 2021 at 3:12 | comment | added | Terry Loring | @Anyon Good to know about the increase. Thanks. | |
| Sep 5, 2021 at 0:35 | comment | added | Anyon | Recently (actually, apparently it was a little over a year ago) arXiv increased the default size limit to 50 MB, so having too large images (or too many) should be much rarer than it used to be. | |
| Sep 4, 2021 at 21:17 | history | answered | Terry Loring | CC BY-SA 4.0 |