• Support PF! Buy your school textbooks, materials and every day products Here!

May a layman post a scientific manuscript in arXiv?

  • #26
22,097
3,282
You are right. On the other hand, as far as I know, Perelman published his proofs on the ArXiv only.
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.
 
  • #27
Dr. Courtney
Education Advisor
Insights Author
Gold Member
3,207
2,295
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.
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:

Related Threads on May a layman post a scientific manuscript in arXiv?

  • Last Post
Replies
14
Views
793
Replies
5
Views
8K
  • Last Post
Replies
20
Views
3K
  • Last Post
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • Last Post
Replies
13
Views
12K
  • Last Post
Replies
0
Views
1K
  • Last Post
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • Last Post
Replies
9
Views
4K
  • Last Post
4
Replies
84
Views
11K
Top