Saturday, February 4, 2012

Guidelines for arXiv Review

arXiv Review:

1. Each submission to arXiv has a (potential) review page (thread or section of comments and reviews) in arXiv Review.

2. Each review page is identified following the article identification scheme in References to and in arXiv Documents.

For example, the article arXiv:math/9910001v1 — refers to — could* have a review page arXiv-Review:math/9910001v1 — (abs for "abstract" in arXiv, rev for "review" in arXiv Review).

3. When a submission to arXiv achieves a level of acceptance** from the reviewers on arXiv Review, it is promoted to published status.

This can be found in a separate section of arXiv Review:<indentifier> (pub for "published").

This makes the "pub" section of arXiv Review (and its various subsections) effectively an open access journal.

This is how it works:

1. A scientist submits an article to arXiv. If they want it to be reviewed for publication they would submit a link to the article on arXiv to arXiv Review. (The article itself stays on arXiv.)

2. Comments (reviews and ratings) are opened on arXiv Review for the article.

3. When the reviewers of arXiv Review "accept" the article for publication, it is promoted to the "published" section of arXiv Review.

For example, an article in > math > math.DG that is accepted for publication by the reviewers of arXiv Review would appear in the arXiv Review Journal of Differential Geometry section of

This is to say that under > math > math.DGthere is the arXiv Review Journal of Differential Geometry, a peer-created open access journal; under > quant-ph, arXiv Review Journal of Quantum Physics; ...

This post is a continuation of the discussion in scientific journals in the e-publishing age and the discussion on Google+. (And more comments here.)

There is also a Google+ page for arXiv Review.

2012/02/07 (via comment on Google+): The organization appears like it provides publications exactly along the lines of arXiv Review Journal of <whatever subject area>. (And apparently this organization has funding and people to maintain their site. That is critical.)

In each published paper there is a link to an article: e.g.

So if this organization (or parallel organizations) could take on all of subject areas, then the process seems pretty much along the way of being resolved. (And include Journals as well as Proceedings.)

(Note in the bibtex of the above example: publisher = "Open Publishing Association". There you go!)

And more at: Community Peer Review

* could, since not every submission to arXiv may have a review page in arXiv Review
** the article rating and acceptance process is TBD