A message from our CEO about the future of Stack Overflow and Stack Exchange. Read now.

Hot answers tagged

118

There is a long tradition of posting joke papers to arXiv on or around April Fool's Day, especially in astro-ph - see the list below. The fact that all these papers were approved for arXiv offers some evidence (though not proof) that joke papers are okay. It's probably best to limit joke papers to around April 1, though, when people know to be on the ...


86

In mathematics, there are several reasons to post to the arXiv: It provides free access to papers that might otherwise be hidden behind paywalls. Of course you could achieve this by posting on your web page, but your web page may move or disappear, while the arXiv is far more stable. This means it's better for archival purposes and it's better suited for ...


77

Yes, you should check with any co-authors before publicly posting a preprint of work that is not yet published. They may prefer that you not post it at this time (e.g. if they have a particular timeline in mind for when they want to publicly share the work, given other related things they are working on). Even if they have no reason to object, you should ...


77

Using arXiv instead of a conference / journal reference has an obvious disadvantage: readers won't know that the paper eventually passed peer review and was published. This is important context, especially if they want to cite the paper themselves later. Using arXiv in addition to a conference / journal reference might make sense, but some might consider ...


75

"Shall I poison a well to see how many drink out of it?" Frankly, the idea of debunking review processes is not that new, and the latest wave started with the Sokal hoax. There were a couple of follow-ups, with computer-generated papers. The result was a scandal, a journalistic anecdote. It created attention. Been there, done that. It's no longer an ...


64

Submitting to ArXiv is a form of publication. You always need the consent of all coauthors to publish anything, anywhere.


58

I understand your logic, but I do not think that many people treat papers on arXiv in that way. Papers on arXiv are public unlike the papers you reviewed or the work you just heard by personal communication. As such, extending the results in a paper on arXiv is a perfectly acceptable practice as long as the second paper cites the paper on arXiv properly.


58

Congratulations on your paper! You don't have to, but it would be a good idea to make an arXiv account and use it to claim ownership of the paper. This will make it easier for people to find your work when searching by your name, and vice versa. It will also establish an account that you can use for any future papers you write. The fact that you're an ...


54

Papers published in (reputable) journals are reviewed by other scientists (peer review), which usually makes it considerably more difficult to publish a paper there. By contrast papers on the ArXiv only receive a brief inspection to keep out utter crap. Thus, most academic evaluations consider only peer-reviewed publications or value them considerably higher....


54

The major use case of arXiv is for disseminating manuscripts that you also publish in a journal or conference. By posting a preprint on arXiv, people can find your research, build on it, cite it, and give you feedback on it immediately, while at the same time the same work goes through the (sometimes slow) peer review process. Some of these papers will fall ...


51

You are generally allowed to publish even in a non-open access journal even if a pre-print is on the arXiv. Most journal copyright agreements explicitly allow the authors to post the article online. Here's an example of a fairly generous one: The ASL hereby grants to the Author the non-exclusive right to reproduce the Article, to create derivative ...


51

At least in mathematics, the arXiv is a pre-print server --- papers are mostly eventually published, and receive DOIs then. In fact, the arXiv encourages authors to add these DOIs to the arXiv metadata when they become available. I think it could be quite confusing for papers to end up with two DOIs. Given that the arXiv numbering scheme works quite well, ...


50

I suggest you respond to the student and your former advisor roughly as follows: You do not consent to their proposal to publish the paper, as prepared, with you listed as 4th author. You believe that the substance of your contribution entitles you to first authorship, either on this paper, or on another paper to be published with citation priority. You ...


48

Remove it. It is not appropriate to mislead people as to the submission or publication status of your paper. You should also remove any other reference to the conference appearing in the paper (e.g. a logo). Additionally, you'll have to upload your LaTeX source to arXiv in order to have it posted, including the conference style file, so you should make ...


41

Disclaimer: I have very limited experience, so what follows may not accurately reflect professional conventions. That said, from my limited experience I think it does. EDIT: Disclaimer the second: the answer below assumes that you are correct, and also says nothing about what you should do besides what to write in the paper. Noah Snyder's comment below is ...


41

arXiv.org is a multi-institutional e-print repository funded by universities and other research organisations costing hundreds of thousands of dollars to run. It's purpose is rapid dissemination of papers and to provide a permanent open access archive for the professional research community. Submission of papers is in principle open to anyone but those ...


40

Mistakes are "bad" in academia if you fail to disclose them once you know about them (which constitutes unethical behavior), or if they affect something that counts towards a formal credential (like a degree; which is unlikely for an arXiv submission). So, the way forward is: Inform your co-authors (if there were any). Upload an updated version of your ...


39

Not necessarily, but this is to be dealt with on a case-by-case basis. You can have an idea of which policies have been adopted by which publishers/journals by having a look at the webpage of Sherpa/Romeo.


39

Yes, this is in general OK. The main limitations on posting old papers to the arXiv are (1) copyright considerations (i.e. you must either hold the copyright, or have permission from the copyright holder to post the e-print) and (2) the approval of your co-authors, or at least the corresponding author, which can put you in a hazy gray area if you can no ...


39

As you become established as a scholar, you will receive more and more of such invitations, most of which are either scams or trash publications attempting to trick you into giving them content. A small fraction, however, will actually come from legitimate colleagues who are inviting you to a special issue, editorial, or similar such opportunity. Thus, ...


39

Why are so many people publishing [on ArXiv]? You have to be careful with terminology when making statements like that. ArXiv is certainly "publishing" in the literal sense of "making public" but would you say that you'd "published a book" if you'd just put it on your website? Probably not. My question is, why were journals used to begin with? Because ...


39

arXiv is a respected repository for physics and math preprints. In some fields of physics, it is actually the primary venue through which new papers are read. viXra is a site for people, almost exclusively cranks, who cannot or will not put their material on arXiv. Don't use it.


38

If you publish your paper on ArXiv before it is published in a peer-reviewed journal, others may steal your work and publish it peer-reviewed before you do and thus take the scientific credit. It’s difficult to attack those people since the ArXiv is not peer-reviewed. This assumes that peer-reviewed publications determine scientific credit, which may be ...


38

No, you shouldn't just submit to the arXiv instead of journals. Articles in the arXiv are not considered published in the traditional sense, and they are not peer reviewed. In fields that use the arXiv, papers are typically submitted there and to a journal (but you can do this only if the journal's policies permit it, so you should check if you aren't ...


37

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 ...


37

Their about page seems to be blank, and their terms and conditions read "I'm NOT a spammer! arQiv.org reserve the right to refuse service to anyone. You must agree to use our website." The heated denial of spamming is not very convincing, especially when they just e-mailed you out of the blue to announce that someone was searching for one of your articles ...


35

First of all The mail to me was also cc-ed to some big persons in top-ranked universities. For me this would already be a red flag and result in not endorsing them. The Arχiv explicitly instructs you not to spam when seeking endorsement: Please note, however, that it is inappropriate to email large numbers of potential endorsers at once, or to ...


33

DOIs have a technical purpose and a bolted-on social purpose. The technical purpose for DOIs is to be an actionable identifier for intellectual works (such as articles) that outlives technology changes, domain-name changes, business-model failures, mergers and acquisitions, and all the other stuff that makes ordinary URLs 404. (Thinking of it as a URL-...


33

The arXiv (pronounced "archive")is a repository of electronic preprints, known as e-prints, of scientific papers in the fields of mathematics, physics, astronomy, computer science, quantitative biology, statistics, and quantitative finance, which can be accessed online. So, please do not upload joke papers. These papers are not helping the community, and ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible