ArXiv Research Output Trends 2006 - Stats Visualization

  • Thread starter Thread starter marcus
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Arxiv Stats
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The forum discussion focuses on the trends in research output for High Energy Physics - Theory (hep-th) as reported by ArXiv for the years 2006 and 2007. The data indicates a 10% increase in direct submissions to hep-th from 2070 in the first eight months of 2006 to 2209 in the same period of 2007, while cross-listings remained stable. The total submissions for 2006 were 3295, with 1501 cross-listings, and the rough estimate for 2007 suggests a total of approximately 3600 submissions. The discussion also highlights a potential shift in publication standards and the influence of societal acceptance on research dissemination.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of ArXiv submission processes
  • Familiarity with High Energy Physics - Theory (hep-th) terminology
  • Knowledge of research output metrics and trends
  • Awareness of peer-review publication processes
NEXT STEPS
  • Analyze ArXiv submission trends using statistical tools like R or Python
  • Investigate the impact of societal changes on academic publishing standards
  • Explore the relationship between preprint submissions and peer-reviewed publications
  • Review historical data on hep-th submissions for long-term trends
USEFUL FOR

Researchers, physicists, and academic publishers interested in the dynamics of research output in High Energy Physics, as well as those analyzing trends in preprint submissions and publication standards.

marcus
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
Gold Member
Dearly Missed
Messages
24,752
Reaction score
795
Physics news on Phys.org
Thanks for the prompt, arivero.

==quote arXiv==
High Energy Physics - Theory ('06)
High Energy Physics - Theory ('07)

available title/author lists of hep-th papers, + cross-listings to hep-th, received during given months (each '|' represents 10 titles):

* 0601 (Jan '06) |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| 236 + 108
* 0602 (Feb '06) |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||! 296 + 101
* 0603 (Mar '06) ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||! 256 + 130
* 0604 (Apr '06) ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| 219 + 131
* 0605 (May '06) |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| 296 + 147
* 0606 (Jun '06) ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| 287 + 127
* 0607 (Jul '06) ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||! 251 + 117
* 0608 (Aug '06) |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||! 229 + 110
* 0609 (Sep '06) ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||! 226 + 119
* 0610 (Oct '06) ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||! 336 + 132
* 0611 (Nov '06) |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||! 354 + 142
* 0612 (Dec '06) ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||! 309 + 137

'06 Total: 3295 + 1501

* 0701 (Jan '07) |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||! 294 + 121
* 0702 (Feb '07) ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| 229 + 104
* 0703 (Mar '07) ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||! 290 + 115
* 0704 (Apr '07) ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| 245 + 109
* 0705 (May '07) |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| 333 + 147
* 0706 (Jun '07) ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| 302 + 128
* 0707 (Jul '07) |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| 259 + 142
* 0708 (Aug '07) ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| 257 + 95

'07 Total: 2209 + 961

==endquote==
the first 8 months of 2006 showed 2070 + 971 (submissions + crosslistings)
the first 8 months of 2007 showed 2209 + 961

So the crosslistings to hep-th from other departments were about the same (971, 961) but the direct posting to hep-th showed a 10 percent rise! (2070, 2209)

some sample years:
2002--- 3334 + 1339
2005--- 3239 + 1438
2006--- 3295 + 1501
(2007--- 3600+ ? rough estimate)

Hep-th contains a lot else besides string, so I do not know if this 10 percent recovery will be reflected in string submissions as well. I have made a rough estimate for hep-th as a whole assuming the 10 percent rise you pointed out to me.

As a final step maybe one should translate preprint submissions into an expectation of how much peer-review publication there will be. Lately I have been watching the Harvard abstracts list which just tallies the papers actually published.
 
Last edited:
It appears to me that there is a relaxation by the "old guards", due to contributing evidences that other explanations might be valid which encourages people to dig out and update their papers from the bottom of their file drawers.
You only need to make the comparison with what is now accepted on TV shows, advertising, etc., that were taboo to discuss only a few short years ago.
(eg. adult diappers/inconsistencies, erectile difficulties)
jal
 
jal said:
It appears to me that there is a relaxation by the "old guards",... comparison with what is now accepted on TV shows,...
(eg. adult diapers..., erectile difficulties)

preprints in hep-th have been flat or slightly down for 2002-2006 and now seem to be climbing again---you attribute this to declining standards of what is interesting or important enough to make public. And compare this with big diaper access to network TV.
outrageous:biggrin:
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
26
Views
5K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 28 ·
Replies
28
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 28 ·
Replies
28
Views
5K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K