Is it legal to upload a paper to arXiv when it is under double blind review for one of the IEEE journals? I am suspicious that it may violate the double blind review requirements and I couldn't find any thing in the journal's homepage specific to this issue. In general IEEE allows preprint versions to be uploaded to arXiv.

  • 23
    Why don't you ask the editor? That seems like the easiest way to get a definitive answer. – Anonymous Mathematician Feb 12 '14 at 0:26
  • 1
    Yes you are right :) sorry for asking here !! I sent a mail to the editor regarding the question. When I receive the answer I will post it here. – fermat4214 Feb 12 '14 at 2:01
  • 16
    Great, posting it here is a reasonable way to record the knowledge for others who may wonder. – Anonymous Mathematician Feb 12 '14 at 2:09
  • 6
    "Legal" is not the word you want here. Governments don't care. The journal might care. Your peers might care. But the law doesn't give a (&%#. – dmckee --- ex-moderator kitten Jul 5 '14 at 18:52
  • 2
    Copy Right issues are in the scope of courts and there is a contract you sign please be aware of your legal activities. – fermat4214 Jul 7 '14 at 2:47

I have just received an email from the editor and I am writing it here

Dear Dr. * * *,

We cannot prevent an author to upload her/his paper to Arxiv. However, because of the double-blind process applied in Communication Letters, we don’t encourage it. There is only one restriction: Your paper should stand alone without any supplementary material and/or reference to an ArXiv post.


  • 8
    Hence it seems to be it is legal, however you shouldn't provide any clue about the arXiv link in the submitted paper. – fermat4214 Feb 15 '14 at 10:38
  • 1
    I got positive reply from the editor about uploading to arxiv since IEEE has sherpa-Green policy, however I didnt upload to arxiv. While thinking the process I decided not to put the double blind review process at risk. – fermat4214 Jan 23 '19 at 9:52

You mix two things, especially in the comments to the answer by jwenting:

  1. Fair review process, which in the journal you chose means double-blind review.
  2. Free access to information, which in your opinion seems to mean that the article should be open-access.

While the second can be true, it cannot mean you break the first one. So: It's quite wrong to pre-publish an article if it's under a double-blind review. At least unless you have a permission from the Editor to do so. Once it's accepted, it's just between you and the copyright transfer rules of the journal.

Since IMHO violating a contact is basically illegal, my opinion is that pre-publishing it is very likely both illegal and nonethical.

  • 1
  • 3
    It basically says, when you submit your paper to IEEE non-open access journals you have right to publish preprint version on third party trusted print servers (not the final version). IEEE currently has just arXiv for trusted third party print servers. So you can do both at last :) it should be like this definitely. – fermat4214 Feb 12 '14 at 10:48
  • 1
    Well, it just means that IEEE specifically allows you to do so, no matter whether the article will be double-blind reviewed. However, in general, what I said is true. – yo' Feb 12 '14 at 10:58
  • 2
    IMHO "preprint version" doesn't necessarily mean "while under review": it may just be a term for "your manuscript as opposed to the journal version typeset by the publisher" – cbeleites unhappy with SX Feb 12 '14 at 17:36
  • 1
    @cbeleites Typically these two things coincide. You put together an article, you publish it as a preprint and you send it to an article. At least around me, people rarely publish preprints in the sense "work in progress" – yo' Feb 12 '14 at 19:06

Legal? Sure. There's no law against it.
Contract violation? Possibly, ask the editor.
Ethical? Something else entirely. Quite possibly not.

  • I am asking it, since it is double blind review. Actually, you give clue about the identities of the authors. – fermat4214 Feb 12 '14 at 7:38
  • 1
    @fermat4214 so ask the publisher. And hence also the hint that it might not be ethical. – jwenting Feb 12 '14 at 7:42
  • 2
    I asked and waiting for the answer, when I get the answer I will also post it here. By the way for ethical part I want to say something; It is definitely ethical, actually opposing information dissemination is non-ethical, information belongs to humankind and luckily society is becoming more open. Therefore, just considering the legality while IEEE allows pre-print versions to be uploaded to arXiv (which is just an e-print server not a journal). – fermat4214 Feb 12 '14 at 8:15
  • 2
    @fermat4214 breaking the double blind criteria is the potentially unethical part, as it can violate the independence and impartiality of the reviewers. – jwenting Feb 12 '14 at 8:57
  • 3
    @tohecz Torts are not illegal, they are torts. The government adjudicates and enforces judgement but is not the complaintant. The law doesn't say that you should not violate contract, it says that if you do then the harmed person has a legal process to obtain compensation from you. Many people--including me--think that you shouldn't violate contracts even when it is to your advantage, but that is a moral rather than legal supposition. – dmckee --- ex-moderator kitten Jul 5 '14 at 18:52

Even it is legal, is is subverting the process of double blind review. I would not do it, but of course, I understand that the advantage it may bring to you may be tempting.

At least in my field it is widespread practice of lab submitting multiple papers to very competitive conferences which take double blind review extremely seriously, and then doing everything they can to actually reveal themselves as the authors (e.g. lab head goes on the "tour" of good universities presenting exactly the same work which is in the review process, hoping that the reviewers of the submitted papers will be in the audience).

I don't like, it is cheating, even if it is nominally legal.


As jwenting points out, there is nothing illegal in doing this. Further, since you don't really have much of a contract (yet) with the journal, there are few possible negative outcomes from this - apart from immediate rejection of your submission. Most importantly, though:

  • In all situations where you do not know if it's OK to do something with a paper, either before or after publication, ask the journal first.

Certainly, do not attempt to upload your paper to the arXiv (or similar repository) whilst your paper is under double-blind review (or any type of journal submission, really), without informing the editor. Failing to do this can be interpreted as acting in bad faith and it is likely to set the editors against you from the start.

Having the manuscript freely available (and possibly easily googleable) completely negates the purpose of the double blind review, as it publicly divulges your identity as the author of that manuscript. I would see this as the conflict of two things you want: (1) you want to publish in this highly-respected journal, which at least partly built its reputation through things like double-blind review, and (2) you want your paper available to everyone as soon as possible.

Those two things are incompatible, and you need to choose one of the two. You're not giving away much; you simply need to sit on the paper for maybe a month or two (or however long the review process takes) and you can then upload your eprint. You're not "opposing information dissemination", you're under an embargo of sorts, which is perfectly reasonable and which you're submitting to voluntarily through your choice of journal. (Note, in particular, that public policies that mandate the open access of taxpayer-funded research do not usually require this until six months after the publication; they definitely do not apply before it.)


No. I checked with the IEEE customer service and they told me one cannot upload a paper to arXiv when it is under double blind review for one of the IEEE journals. See details below if interested.

I asked the question to one of the conferences (viz., ICASSP 2020) publishing their proceedings in IEEE and here is the response I received:

IEEE policy permits authors to post their articles to the preprint repository arXiv. Posting rules for each stage of the article life cycle are:

  • Pre-submission: Before submission to an IEEE publication, the papers may be posted anywhere, including to arXiv.
  • Upon acceptance: Upon acceptance to an IEEE publication, the arXiv posting must be updated by replacing the pre-submission version with the accepted version. The accepted version must have the IEEE copyright line (© 20XX IEEE) but no other changes may be made. The version suitable for posting is available on the Completed Articles page of the IEEE Author Gateway: https://authorgateway.ieee.org/ag/public/landing.jsp.
  • Upon publication: When the article is published, the posted version on arXiv should be updated with a full citation to the IEEE publication, including DOI. No other changes may be made.

Visit the IEEE Author Center for more information on SPS sharing and posting policies at https://ieeeauthorcenter.ieee.org/.

However, that didn't specify whether one can submit a paper to arXiv after the paper submission deadline and before the notification of acceptance (i.e., while the paper is under review). So I emailed authors@ieee.org about it and got the following response:

Sharing of a submitted paper is allowed under the following circumstances:

  • On authors' personal and employers' Web sites
  • On institutional/funder Web sites if required
  • For authors' own classroom use
  • Only on Scholarly Collaboration Networks (SCNs) that are signatories to the International Association of Scientific, Technical, and Medical Publishers' (STM) "Sharing Principles"

For more details, see https://conferences.ieeeauthorcenter.ieee.org/get-published/post-your-paper/. Thank you for publishing with the IEEE.

I then asked whether arXiv counts as a "Scholarly Collaboration Networks (SCNs) that are signatories to the International Association of Scientific, Technical, and Medical Publishers’ Sharing Principles", and I got the following response:

Thank you for your inquiry. ArXiv does not seem to be included on https://www.howcanishareit.com/ , which is the Web site that lists the permitted SCNs. Some SCNs where the article can be shared are listed there.

That being said, I would advice to double check with each conference you are targeting to make sure that they don't have any extra policy on top of IEEE policies.


  • IEEE is in that wiki page and please check the following page v2.sherpa.ac.uk/romeo AND the following page journals.ieeeauthorcenter.ieee.org/… THIRD item says "arXiv.org, TechRxiv.org, or any not-for-profit preprint server approved by the Publication Services and Products Board (PSPB)" and nothing is mentioned about "double blind" review – fermat4214 May 10 at 18:59

Certainly, do not attempt to upload your paper to the arXiv (or similar repository) whilst your paper is under double-blind review (or any type of journal submission, really), without informing the editor.

I definitely do not recommend to do it. First, an Editor, of course, will say no as he must follow the review policy. Secondly, if your paper is indeed of high quality, there is always a risk that your idea could be leaked (it is normal that people communicate with each other about topic in your paper). If you decide to submit to arXiv, you should follow the rule “don’t ask, don’t tell”. So, you should never ask Editor anything about arXiv, and the Editor, who understands this problem, would not say you anything about arXiv. It is a normal practise now when the paper goes to journal and to arXiv at the same time.

  • 2
    Do you have any evidence to back up your claims? The accepted answer clearly contradicts that the editor will say no. If you have evidence of leaking of ArXiv papers, take a look at this question. Why should adhere to a general ”don’t ask, don’t say” regarding the ArXiv with editors? Remember that journals could ban preprints entirely, if they were against it – and the editors can even care less, as they are usually not paid by the journal. In fact, many journals allow submitting papers directly from ArXiv. – Wrzlprmft Aug 6 '14 at 16:16
  • 1
    I did not say anything about leaking from arxiv. I imply that if you submit a high quality manuscript in a journal you should upload your submission to arxiv as well to prevent a leakage of your idea. This is exactly what I said. What I recommended is to submit the manuscript to a journal and to arxiv at the same time, and follow the principle 'don't ask, don't tell'. Evidences of leakage? Please read what Grisha Perelman, who refused to take prestigious Fields Medal and million dollars premium, wrote about plagiarism in science. – John Smith Aug 6 '14 at 18:51
  • ”I did not say anything about leaking from arxiv.” – at least that’s the obvious way to interpret your loosely connected sentences. Also, “do not attempt to upload your paper to the arXiv … whilst your paper is under double-blind review …, without informing the editor.” is almost the opposite of “What I recommended is to submit the manuscript to a journal and to arxiv at the same time, and follow the principle 'don't ask, don't tell'.” Finally, can you link or cite Perelman? He did not exactly write much in the last years, IIRC. – Wrzlprmft Aug 6 '14 at 21:41
  • I gave the comment to the sentence: "Certainly, do not attempt to upload your paper to the arXiv ...". This sentence is just copy/paste from this blog. Here is the link about Perelman: newyorker.com/magazine/2006/08/28/manifold-destiny – John Smith Aug 7 '14 at 1:38
  • If you want to comment on that sentence, make clear that it is a quote, e.g. by prepending >. Also you should have made clear better what pronouns in your sentences are referring to and somewhat relate your sentences to something. Finally, Perelman does not say, let alone write anything about plagiarism in that article (the term is only mentioned in the context of Yau’s accusations of plagiarism against Tian) while any quote from Perelman is very unspecific. – Wrzlprmft Aug 7 '14 at 6:42

I have many publications in peer review journals. Let me share my experience. If you have a high quality manuscript, I recommend you to submit the manuscript to a journal and also to upload it to arxiv. Do not ask Editor anything about arxiv as it is completely counterproductive. If due to some reasons your manuscript is rejected from the journal, you will save your idea in arxiv at least. Further you can refer to your arxiv paper for future peer review journal publications.

  • 3
    The question is whether this is allowed in a double blind review scenario. This does not seem to answer that question. – ff524 Aug 6 '14 at 19:36
  • The question was not whether this is allowed. The question is if you should you ask Editor about arxiv. – John Smith Aug 6 '14 at 20:09
  • 2
    I don't see anything about asking an editor in the question. The question is, "Is it legal to upload a paper to arXiv when it is under double blind review for one of the IEEE journals?" – ff524 Aug 6 '14 at 20:11
  • Agree. But this is just a title. The core of the problem is if you should ask an Editor about upload to arxiv. My opinion (and experience) - no, you should not. – John Smith Aug 6 '14 at 20:27
  • 1
    Double blind review is an important point here, since you make your identity open while the review process wants the opposite (also you cannot say "in our previous work [x] we got blah blah blah" since you make your identity open while writing Author 1 and Author 2 in the title page) – fermat4214 Aug 8 '14 at 14:08

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.