94

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 ...


82

I think there are basically two cases here: The student is presenting or leading discussion on your work as part of a "journal club" sort of series, and the abstract is your abstract because they're talking about your paper. The student is baldly and ridiculously plagiarizing. I think a good way to approach this is to assume case #1, and make contact with ...


78

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 ...


71

I think that what you're seeing here is a conference chair who doesn't understand what arXiv is and is blindly applying the self-plagiarism policy. The IEEE's current official FAQ on author rights has a question dedicated to arXiv that explicitly states that arXiv publication is permitted. Thus, there is no concern on that account. The IEEE CrossCheck ...


68

Emailing them could be acceptable -- and I would even say it should be encouraged! -- but you have to tread very carefully. If you write an email like Hey Dr. Jones, I saw your newest paper on arXiv and I noticed you didn't cite [Wouter et al, 2020], do you think you can post an update and cite me? Wouter this would come across very poorly, and ...


66

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


65

I’m happy to assume your premise that you are not a crank and the research you generate is comparable in quality to mainstream research that gets published in peer-reviewed journals. Here’s the problem though: it’s not me you’re trying to impress. The academics who you are hoping will “take your work seriously” are not assuming that premise. And it’s not ...


61

Making the paper accessible to everyone who can't look behind the paywall might hurt the journal's publishing company a little bit by diverting some demand. However, it won't really hurt the people you have been dealing with. Moreover, the journal has given you explicit permission to publish a pre-print, so you're not going against their stated request. At ...


51

There might be any number of reasons. You might try to contact the author(s) to get more information. But... (not all with the same likelihood) They might have left academia for various reasons and not bothered. Is the CV also old? They might have incorporated the key ideas into another paper with a very different title. You search is then fruitless. ...


50

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 ...


45

Meaning of peer review When people say "peer review" in regards to a scholarly work, they are implying they refer to the "scholarly peer review process", not to some generic review by peers in the general sense of the meaning of the individual words "peer" and "review". This process refers to review by your scholarly ...


44

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 ...


41

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 ...


39

I believe the first thing you need to do is to contact and email the editor in chief of that journal and give him/her a link to your arxiv paper. He/She a long with the editorial board have to retract the article (hopefully, with a big red X stating that the authors have plagiarised citing your arxiv work).


39

Most journals now allow and even encourage the use of preprint servers. Some, however, still prohibit it on the notion that it is competition with their own publication of the article, or even consider it self-plagiarism. This tends to be field-dependent as well: some fields (e.g., physics, mathematics) are very liberal in policy, while others tend to be ...


39

Basically, if I understand you correctly, you want proof of priority without publishing. Well, this problem is well known from middle-ages and renaissance where people wanted to be able to prove they have the earliest solution without revealing what it is (so that if someone finds it, they can prove they were there first). They often used anagrams, today you ...


38

After forwarding my email to the director of the publishing company, he put the paper online, so it appears that this was an administrative issue. I thank everyone for their input and apologise for the noise.


38

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

In mathematics, currently, it seems to me that if you have some good, interesting ideas and can present them well, and put documents on arXiv, people will look at them. I look at arXiv daily (and, also, web pages of people I know) for new things. I rarely look at on-line versions of "peer-reviewed journals", because all that stuff is a year or two ...


37

Does the rise of pre-prints make science and publishing less credible? No. Peer reviewed publications are still peer reviewed. People who do not know the difference between a preprint and a peer reviewed publication are not in a position to judge the credibility of science. Does it increase the pressure to publish because it adds an additional tier to ...


36

In mathematics (maybe in other fields too), one would put at the end of the introduction a statement like "After obtaining the results in this paper, we learned of related work by X. In particular, X obtained ...." Here the "..." would be a description like "a stronger form of our Theorem 7" or "a weaker form of our Theorem 7" or "a result related to our ...


36

If you can prove or at least make a convincing case for the conjecture in the special case you need, I'd do the following: Describe the conjecture in the special case Prove or make the convincing case in the special case Write "in a previous draft, we expected this conjecture to hold generally. However, it has subsequently been shown ..." If you can't or ...


35

As I see it, the main reasons to use arXiv and similar preprint servers are: To disseminate your paper without waiting for the peer review and publishing process. This is a serious issue - in mathematics, for example, peer review often takes a year or more, and it can be several more years before your paper gets to the front of the queue to actually appear ...


35

It seems to me that this question is less about the arxiv per se and more about how to navigate doing research in a very fast moving academic field. I get the impression that arXiv is more than just putting something on a personal website. It's certainly different. The main differences are: (i) Many more people will see your paper. (ii) Your paper ...


33

Your collaborator is a jerk. Don't listen to his nonsense about you being naive; that sounds more like he's trying to justify his bad behavior to himself. You are quite right that this is not appropriate professional behavior. However, I don't think it rises to the sort of ethics violation that could threaten a career. Now that you have a proof of the ...


33

A high school student (with an endorsement as twestley laid out nicely) can publish on the arxiv, but very likely a high school student should not do this. In my field, the arxiv is read daily by everyone in the field. There is no peer-review process, but we do self censor quite a bit. We usually circulate our research through our networks and get feedback ...


30

(Added after @Wolpertinger's suggestion) Does the preprint itself include a link to the final paper? Arxiv abstract pages have a "journal ref" field where the author can include such a link, and some publishers mandate that a journal link must be added to preprints after publications. Search on literature databases (Google Scholar, Scopus, etc.) ...


29

There is not much of a "formal feedback" system associated with the arxiv. I say "not much" instead of "none" because the arxiv apparently does do some degree of automatic tracking of citations to its papers. For instance this arxiv submission contains a link to a MO post in which my paper is (briefly) mentioned. I had not seen that post before, so that ...


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