1. Limited time only! Sign up for a free 30min personal tutor trial with Chegg Tutors
    Dismiss Notice
Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

May a layman post a scientific manuscript in arXiv?

  1. Jan 8, 2016 #26
    Yeah, but the difference is that if people who are already "known" in the field post something on ArXiv, then it will be read. That is the entire point of ArXiv, so "known" professors can communicate easier with eachother. If somebody totally unkown posts on ArXiv, then nobody will care.
     
  2. Jan 26, 2016 #27
    It is valuable to distinguish the original intent of xxx.lanl.gov from what arXiv has evolved into 25 years later. Communication among "known" professors may have been the entire point of xxx.lanl.gov when it was founded in 1991, but in 2016, arXiv is about much more.

    For example, now there are three "overlay journals" that require posting to arXiv prior to submitting to their peer review process. This Nature news story describes the most recent effort ( http://www.nature.com/news/leading-mathematician-launches-arxiv-overlay-journal-1.18351 ) which is called Discrete Analysis and seems to have a fields medalist (Timothy Gowers) as a leading proponent. Most of the details are described here: https://gowers.wordpress.com/2015/09/10/discrete-analysis-an-arxiv-overlay-journal/

    The utility of arXiv's goal and mission are much broader than Ginsparg's original intent. The goal and mission are

    arXiv is an openly accessible, moderated repository for scholarly articles in specific scientific disciplines. Material submitted to arXiv is expected to be of interest, relevance, and value to those disciplines. arXiv reserves the right to reject or reclassify any submission. Submissions are reviewed by expert moderators to verify that they are topical and refereeable scientific contributions that follow accepted standards of scholarly communication (as exemplified by conventional journal articles).

    Rapid dissemination of scholarly referreeable scientific contributions can potentially serve many goals. In addition to providing access to contributions of "known" professors and a venue for overlay journals, arXiv allows authors to establish priority for an idea or experiment, it allows works to be more easily found in a newly emerging field without established journals read by everyone in the field, and it allows new contributions by "unknown" authors to be found, cited, and the methods they contain to be implemented by others before they appear in a reviewed journal.

    When blast TBI became a big deal following the invasion of Afghanistan, we worked hard to invent devices for inexpensive, accurate, and repeatable simulation of blast waves for laboratory experiments. We published three papers in Review of Scientific Instruments, but since these devices are used by scientists in many fields, most researchers found our papers in arXiv instead. We certainly weren't known in the field before the papers appeared on arXiv, but posting the e-prints allowed collaborations to proceed with colleagues at various institutions before the papers even appeared in print.

    I think a case can also be made that arXiv provides a useful venue for papers that never appear in reviewed journals. Consider our paper, "Sheep Collisions: The Good, the Bad, and the TBI." This paper corrects an errant analysis in Halliday, Resnick, and Walker and lays out a more accurate framework for understanding sheep collisions. Jearl Walker has taken note of the paper on his Flying Circus of Physics web site, and the paper has often been referenced in educational blogs and classroom use. It has also been cited in a few Australian government reports and in the Journal of Orthopaedic & Sports Physical Therapy. I think the paper was even discussed favorably here on Physics Forums.

    We were completely unknown in the TBI world when this paper was posted to arXiv. We were too busy working on a more important paper (A Thoracic Mechanism of Mild Traumatic Brain Injury Due to Blast Pressure Waves, http://arxiv.org/abs/0812.4757 ) to bother shepherding the sheep paper through the peer review process. The "thoracic mechanism" paper did not appear in a peer-reviewed journal either, but it's been cited 100 times.
     
    Last edited: Jan 26, 2016
Share this great discussion with others via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook




Loading...