4

Sometimes arxiv moderators may not agree with content of a submitted manuscript. Although it's rare, the submitted manuscript may be rejected even if it contains novel or original results.

During submission the manuscript is stamped by the arxiv submission system with the classification and date of submission.

Can I use a stamped arxiv manuscript as a proof (priority of a physics or math formula, new method or some other idea) if it has been rejected? If yes, how this could be done? Can I publish the stamped paper online and claim it as an official arxiv document?

|improve this question
  • 1
    I believe this answer may be helpful to you: The fact that the arXiv has time stamps and keeps old versions available is potentially useful for resolving disputes, but the important aspect is that papers on the arXiv get noticed. That's why the arXiv is a good way to establish priority: the community doesn't consider "Oh, I had no idea that paper was on the arXiv" to be a good excuse. By contrast, if you post the paper somewhere much more obscure, then not noticing it would not be surprising or frowned upon. – ff524♦ Dec 28 '16 at 7:32
  • 4
    I would take a close look at the Arxiv Moderation FAQ here: arxiv.org/help/moderation . A scientifically motivated result that is presented in a clear fashion shouldn't have an issue getting onto arxiv; the standards for "acceptance" are very low by academic standards. – Benjamin Horowitz Jan 5 '17 at 23:51
18

I recommend against it. You can put online anything you like and use it to claim priority, but if the paper is hosted on your personal website then you lose the credibility that the date stamp of an official arXiv-hosted paper comes with (since just the stamp itself would be easy to forge), so in the event of a priority dispute this would not be a foolproof form of evidence.

Also, as has been discussed in other questions on academia.se (can't look it up right now), people who are new to academic publishing worry excessively about their ideas being stolen by others. Especially given that your manuscript was rejected by arXiv, the chances of this happening are effectively zero. You would be much better off using your energy to write a good manuscript rather than worrying about datestamps.

|improve this answer
  • 8
    @JohnSmith I have a feeling that you have very little idea of what you are talking about in that comment. – Tobias Kildetoft Dec 28 '16 at 14:36
  • 3
    @JohnSmith your question is clear enough. As I said, if your goal is to establish priority, your strategy is not a foolproof one. Considering the existence of other time stamping methods that are more reliable (see e.g. here), I would recommend against using the rejected arXiv manuscript. – Dan Romik Dec 28 '16 at 15:24
  • 1
    @DanRomik Thank you for a reasonable suggestion. I also found in internet that vixra.org is an alternative to arxiv.org. However, I am not sure if this file repository is well-recognized by scientific community. – John Smith Dec 28 '16 at 15:41
  • 12
    @John viXra is recognized in the sense that people are likely to know of it. This is not a point in its favor, as it is generally considered that the proportion of worthwhile papers there is infinitesimal. – Tobias Kildetoft Dec 29 '16 at 19:07

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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