Friday, July 22, 2011

Subscribing to Arxiv

Many years ago, friends in physics told me that every day they looked at the preprints uploaded on the Arxiv website on that day. A few days ago, a friend in probability and combinatorics told me that he was doing the same. This week, I followed my sheep instincts:
Subject: subscribe Claire Mathieu
add DS
Now, every day I receive an email from arxiv listing all "preprints on the topic of Data Structures and Algorithms" published in the past 24 hours, along with their abstracts. From now on I will be able to keep up with current research, not with a lag of a couple of years as happens to people who read journal articles, not with a lag of six months as happens to people who read conference proceedings, not with a lag of three months as happens to people who study lists of accepted papers to conferences and immediately search for papers of interest (which is what I had been doing), but with a lag of just a couple of days: as soon as authors are ready to claim a result, they publish their preprint on Arxiv, and I hear about it on the next day.

If this catches on -- and it seems to be spreading -- it will change the way we do research. A friend physicist described their way of life: "There is a constant race to be ahead. People rush to publish partial results, putting unpolished drafts on the Arxiv. The pressure to publish is enormous. The number of preprints is large, but the quality is low. There is no vetting for quality, and there are often mistakes." That sounds like the complaints that computer scientists have about conferences, raised to another level of unpleasantness.

Yet I can't deny a certain pleasure in reading abstracts from the previous day's uploads to Arxiv. It feels like I am on the cutting edge of research, no matter where I am physically located anywhere in the world.


  1. You do know they have RSS feeds as well. No sense polluting your inbox even more. (Instead: mix work with fun!)

  2. Have a look at this (rather long, but interesting) discussion about the downsides of arXiv:

    As to your friend physicist's quote: it is not arXiv that changes the way research is done, creates enormous pressure to publish etc. ArXiv is only a tool, the real culprit (I use this word as it is clear from the quote that the author views metnioned tendencies as something harmful) is current academic culture, which in its pathological forms tends to promote careerism and "paper-factory" approach to science.

    Also, the comment about large quantity and low quality of the papers submitted to arXiv makes it clear that merely the possibility to upload papers on a publicly available server is not enough. What is really needed is a decentralized system of peer review. A very crude version of this has been around for some time: Of course, it is very primitive (and not very popular, currently used only by quantum information people), but even the possibility to post comments and vote the papers up or down is a partial remedy to the problem mentioned (don't browse all submissions, only those with top 10 number of votes).

    Such a system is IMHO badly needed and although it doesn't solve all the problems with current publishing system (and creates problems of its own), it would be a significant step forward. It is somewhat amusing that arXiv is an Internet-era scientific tool par excellence and at the same time it is computer scientists who are so slow to adopt it.

  3. Michal, interesting discussion indeed.

    "ArXiv is only a tool": but the tools shape the way you work.

    "it is computer scientists who are so slow to adopt [ArXiv]": maybe because we've been using conferences to have access to information in a timely and somewhat centralized manner, so the need for ArXiv has not been as pressing as in other fields.

  4. In Australia, the push by the government, and in turn, universities, is for more journals not conferences! So you can guess how well we like ArXiv.

  5. As long as we're on the topic of keeping up to date, and RSS feeds... For a while now I've been following the Theory of Computing Blog Aggregator which also has an RSS feed. It includes various theory blogs, as well as papers from the relevant arXiv categories and ECCC.

    As a fan and follower of your blog, I have to say your blog is sorely missing on that particular feed, which quite a few people follow. I don't know what the correct protocol is (whether the blog owner, or blog fans/followers need to write Arvind and ask him to add a blog), but I believe a number of us would be happy to see your blog entries appear there, if you are not averse to the idea.

  6. Thank you Anonymous!
    You are the third person to be mentioning that to me: I yield, and will arrange it with Arvind so that posts related to TCS will be labeled so as to appear there.


Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.