Happy 30th Birthday to the arXiv!

I was reminded yesterday that today, 14th August, is the 30th anniversary of the start of the arXiv so I thought I’d send a quick birthday greeting to mark the occasion. In case you weren’t aware, arXiv is a free distribution service and an open-access archive containing (currently) 1,928,825 scholarly articles in the fields of physics, mathematics, computer science, quantitative biology, quantitative finance, statistics, electrical engineering and systems science, and economics.

There was a precursor to the arXiv in the form of an email distribution list for preprints, but arXiv proper started on 14th August 1991. It was based at Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) with a mirror site in SISSA (Trieste) that was used by those of us in Europe. In the beginning, arXiv was quite a small-scale thing and it wasn’t that easy to upload full papers including figures. In fact the SISSA system was run from a single IBM 386 PC (called “Babbage”). As it expanded, the running of arXiv was taken over Cornell University. You can read more about the history here.

You have to remember that journals didn’t generally have electronic submission in those days: you had to send paper manuscripts in the post to the Editorial office. Likewise many of us carried on sending out paper preprints for some time after the arXiv was set up. Younger researchers should be grateful they don’t have to put up with the absolute chore of producing papers the old-fashioned way!

The astrophysics section of arXiv (“astro-ph”) started in April 1992. Although astrophysicists generally were quick to latch on to this new method of distributing preprints, it took me a little time to get onto arXiv: my first papers did not appear there until February 1993; my first publication was in 1986 so there are quite a few of my early papers that aren’t on arXiv at all. In 1993 I was working at Queen Mary & Westfield College (as it was then called). I was working a lot with collaborators based in Italy at the time and they decided to start posting our joint papers on arXiv. Without that impetus it would have taken me much longer to get to grips with it.

In case you’re interested, my first paper to appear on the arXiv was this one on 23rd February 1993 but it was followed a day later by two others, this one and that one. I don’t remember very well, but this was an exercise in catching up and all three of those papers were actually published in journals before we put them on arXiv. It was only later that we got into the habit of posting papers on arXiv at the same time as submitting to a journal, which I think is the best way to do it!

The Open Journal of Astrophysics would not have been possible without the arXiv but in a wider sense the astrophysics community has a very great deal to thank the arXiv for, but remember that it is funded by donations and is run on a shoestring. If you agree that it’s a tremendously useful asset for your research then please consider making a donation.

11 Responses to “Happy 30th Birthday to the arXiv!”

  1. telescoper Says:

    Is it? Why?

    • telescoper Says:

      Well I find your irrational obsession with a minor inconsequential matter entirely impossible to understand.

    • telescoper Says:

      However much you would like to be a victim, you are not. You have not been bullied and your attitude is an insult to to those who have been. The arXiv people simply moved your paper to a more appropriate category. For some reason you can’t handle this.

      Now please cut the crap and grow up.

  2. telescoper Says:

    arXiv made a decision to move your paper to a different section. It is clear from their rules that they have the right to do this. Their decision seems to have upset you in a way that is completely disproportionate.

  3. Jonathan Thornburg Says:

    The problem is that Helbig’s paper is clearly about cosmology. This isn’t an ambiguous maybe-it-is-maybe-it-isn’t case — the subject matter is *clearly* cosmology. (To anyone who is uncertain: see for yourself by googling “Helbig flatness problem MNRAS” — it’s only 5 pages including references.) And cosmology papers not in astro-ph or gr-qc are less likely to be seen by scientists interested in cosmology. So IMHO moving the paper to a catch-all category like “gen-phys” or “misc” is an injustice.
    The underlying problem is that arXiv has become a monopoly, and monopolies aren’t known for great “customer service”. I realise that arXiv is dealing with a huge number of submissions (and I presume lots and lots of spam and crackpots too — see vixra for a vision of what arXiv would look like with no moderation), but this doesn’t absolve them of the ethical obligation to treat people fairly. In particular, I think all of us in the astrophysics community could benefit from arXiv having a better (more transparent/independent) appeal/redress policy.

    • telescoper Says:

      Well, it seems to me that every paper in the “gen.ph” category is “about” *something” – particle physics, relativity, solid state physics, etc, and indeed many are “about” (or purport to be about) cosmology. Some of them are published too. Evidently the arXiv moderators have adopted a position on what is appropriate for “astro-ph” that results in them moving others to “gen”, just as they seem to have done with other categories.

      I’m not an arXiv moderator myself so I don’t know precisely what criteria they use. The main point to me is that moving a paper to a different category of arXiv is not a big deal for an author as the paper can still be found by keyword searches. In any case arXiv makes it clear at the submission stage that papers are moderated and may be reclassified.

    • Jonathan: I don’t see this paper in gen-physics (or misc) category of arXiv either.

  4. Jonathan Thornburg Says:

    I don’t think the problem is “someone knows or suspects this paper exists; s/he wants to find a copy”. Rather, the problem is how a potential reader might learn of the existence of the paper in the first place. Posting in astro-ph means being included in the daily arXiv astro-ph announcements, which are how many people learn of new astrophysics-and-closely-related-fields papers.
    Conversely, not being in astro-ph means not being in the daily arXiv astro-ph announcements, and thus (for a cosmology paper) a signifcantly smaller readership. *That* is the (or an) injustice that arXiv has done to Phillip Helbig, which I think they should rectify by putting his paper into the obvious-for-its-subject-matter category, namely, astro-ph (or some subcategory thereof).

  5. Jonathan Thornburg Says:

    @Shantanu at 2021-08-22-914am: After being told that his paper (then submitted to arXiv) would only appear in gen-phys (or misc), Helbig withdrew his paper from the arXiv. The copies found by the google search I mentioned earlier are those at MNRAS (who published the paper), or on his own website.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: