相关论文: Extending ArXiv.org to Achieve Open Peer Review an…
The peer review process for scientific publications faces significant challenges due to the increasing volume of submissions and inherent reviewer biases. While artificial intelligence offers the potential to facilitate the process, it also…
An increasing number of scientific publications are created in open and transparent peer review models: a submission is published first, and then reviewers are invited, or a submission is reviewed in a closed environment but then these…
Communicating new scientific discoveries is key to human progress. Yet, this endeavor is hindered by monetary restrictions for publishing one's findings and accessing other scientists' reports. This process is further exacerbated by a large…
The growing impact of preprint servers enables the rapid sharing of time-sensitive research. Likewise, it is becoming increasingly difficult to distinguish high-quality, peer-reviewed research from preprints. Although preprints are often…
Scientific publishing seems to be at a turning point. Its paradigm has stayed basically the same for 300 years but is now challenged by the increasing volume of articles that makes it very hard for scientists to stay up to date in their…
The arXiv has collected 1.5 million pre-print articles over 28 years, hosting literature from scientific fields including Physics, Mathematics, and Computer Science. Each pre-print features text, figures, authors, citations, categories, and…
In high energy physics, scholarly papers circulate primarily through online preprint archives based on a centralized repository, arXiv, that physicists simply refer to as "the archive". This is not just a tool for preservation and memory,…
arXiv is the largest open-access repository for scientific literature. When submitting a paper, authors upload the manuscript's source files, from which the final PDF is compiled. These source files are also publicly downloadable,…
The statistics community, which has traditionally lacked a transparent and open peer-review system, faces a challenge of inconsistent paper quality, with some published work containing substantial errors. This problem resonates with…
The main contributors of scientific knowledge, researchers, generally aim to disseminate their findings far and wide. And yet, publishing companies have largely kept these findings behind a paywall. With digital publication technology…
HEFCE's Policy for open access in the post-2014 Research Excellence Framework states "authors' outputs must have been deposited in an institutional or subject repository". There is no definition of a subject repository in the policy:…
This article offers a personal perspective on the current state of academic publishing, and posits that the scientific community is beset with journals that contribute little valuable knowledge, overload the community's capacity for…
Recent advances in artificial intelligence (AI) have accelerated the growth of both human-authored and AI-generated research outputs, placing increasing strain on traditional academic publishing systems and challenging the scalability of…
Peer review is a cornerstone of modern scientific endeavor. However, there is growing consensus that several limitations of the current peer review system, from lack of incentives to reviewers to lack of transparency, risks to undermine its…
This paper quantifies to which extent preprints in arXiv accelerate scholarly communication. The following subject fields were investigated up to the year 2012: High Energy Physics (HEP), Mathematics, Astrophysics, Quantitative Biology, and…
Peer reviewing is a central process in modern research and essential for ensuring high quality and reliability of published work. At the same time, it is a time-consuming process and increasing interest in emerging fields often results in a…
Preprints play an increasingly critical role in academic communities. There are many reasons driving researchers to post their manuscripts to preprint servers before formal submission to journals or conferences, but the use of preprints has…
The peer review system as used in several computer science communities has several flaws including long review times, overloaded reviewers, as well as fostering of niche topics. These flaws decrease quality, lower impact, slowdown the…
One of the virtues of peer review is that it provides a self-regulating selection mechanism for scientific work, papers and projects. Peer review as a selection mechanism is hard to evaluate in terms of its efficiency. Serious efforts to…
Peer review is the main mechanism by which the software engineering community assesses the quality of scientific results. However, the rapid growth of paper submissions in software engineering venues has outpaced the availability of…