22

Are there other widely used academic pre-print repositories other than ArXiv? My interest is especially towards mathematics and physics.

If possible, one characteristic that I'd like to find in other pre-print repositories is the possibility to update the paper without leaving the older versions online and a better organized "author page" (and, as a note, I personally don't like Research Gate or Academia.edu, which also, as far as I understand, shouldn't be considered pre-print repositories).

Improve this question
10
  • 22
    Why do you need one?
    – Tobias Kildetoft
    Commented Feb 1, 2015 at 11:08
  • 3
    @TobiasKildetoft Curiosity: ArXiv is so well-known and widely used, so I was wondering if there are other such websites which are equally known (but unknown to me).
    – user23758
    Commented Feb 1, 2015 at 11:43
  • 25
    Having an alternative website would be counter-productive to the purpose of arXiv. Almost all researchers in the relevant fields upload their pre-prints to arXiv (where allowed by the journal). They might not bother uploading to two different repositories.
    – Moriarty
    Commented Feb 1, 2015 at 12:07
  • 6
    hal.archives-ouvertes.fr is an open archive supported by the CNRS (National Center for Scientific Research, the French public research agency). Note that articles published on HAL can be automatically transferred to arxiv.
    – Taladris
    Commented Feb 1, 2015 at 16:21
  • 5
    @Moriarty While you are right, this argument can be brought against pretty much any second version of a service, and yet we see alternatives to pretty much anything spring up all the time.
    – xLeitix
    Commented Feb 9, 2015 at 13:55

4 Answers 4

Reset to default
17

In mathematics and physics arXiv is by far the most used and reputable.

Of course, there are thousands other ways to self-archive your paper using not dedicated solutions (like personal website, GitHub, etc) and some general (like FigShare).

Yet, when it comes to pre-print services, they only one I am aware of is http://vixra.org/. It has policy of accepting everything; however, it has reputation of crackpotism (as arXiv is popular and editors rarely reject from it, so for the majority if researchers there is no reason to choose viXra (unless as a protest or something)).

Improve this answer
8
  • 25
    Are you suggesting that vixra paper I read which solved two Millennium Problems in the same paper, might not be legit?
    – user37208
    Commented Mar 13, 2018 at 14:03
  • 5
    "[Moderators] rarely reject from arXiv" is an easy impression to get from the comfort of an institutional email address for which the requirement of endorsement is waived. For the general public, posting on arXiv can be a significantly taxing experience.
    – E.P.
    Commented Mar 14, 2018 at 16:35
  • 3
    @TobiasKildetoft The answer makes an explicit claim that the only reasons to post to viXra are "as a protest or something" instead of a more accurate assessment of "because most people cannot post to arXiv at all" (or only after significant effort). It's easy to lose sight of that from the comfort of the ivory tower but the only thing that that accomplishes is that we look like ivory-tower types.
    – E.P.
    Commented Mar 15, 2018 at 12:48
  • 7
    @E.P. Doing research already takes significant effort. The extra effort to get endorsed in minimal compared to that, and I have yet to hear of someone who had an actual contribution to make and who was not able to get endorsed.
    – Tobias Kildetoft
    Commented Mar 15, 2018 at 12:56
  • 4
    @TobiasKildetoft Assuming that there were people with actual contributions to make who were not able to get endorsed, how likely would you be to hear about it? Or in other words, is it not possible that there is a selection bias acting on your perceptions of the topic? How certain are you of your bayesian priors? I agree that the actual numbers are likely to be very low, but it's still self-serving to pretend that academia is all meritocracy from a position where the bureaucratic barriers have been waived, and I don't think it's a particularly good look as compared to an honest assessment.
    – E.P.
    Commented Mar 15, 2018 at 13:03
6

Try the PeerJ Prepreints. https://peerj.com/preprints/

Here is what I copied from their website:

A PeerJ 'PrePrint' is a draft that has not yet been peer reviewed for formal publication. Similar to preprint servers that already exist (for example arXiv.org), authors can submit draft, incomplete, or final versions of articles they are working on.

Improve this answer
4

One archive that seems to be gaining some traction (possibly more so in Europe) lately is HAL (mentioned in Taladris' comment above). I don't use it personally, but I've been finding a few preprints in my area there recently. Here is their English description:

The open archive HAL

HAL is an open archive where authors can deposit scholarly documents from all academic fields.

For the attention of the authors

The deposit must be made in agreement with the co-authors and in the respect for the policy of the publishers.
The deposit is subject of a control, HAL reserves the right to refuse items that do not meet the criteria of the archive.
Any deposit is definitive, no withdrawals will be made after the on-line posting of the publication.
Text files in pdf format or image files are sent to CINES for long-term archiving.

While it seems you cannot get rid of old versions, it has what I think are somewhat better "author pages" than the arXiv, e.g., this example. (You can differentiate people with the same last name and first initial, unlike the default in the arXiv.)

Improve this answer
1
  • It seems like the new improvements being made to arXiv should help some of the issues with distinguishing authors, though I have not played around that much with the beta version, so I don't know how much they have changed in that regard.
    – Tobias Kildetoft
    Commented Mar 14, 2018 at 20:01
3

Shamelessly copy from https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/295/14341, just tailor it a little bit.

The OSF provides a general open preprint infrastructure that is connected to a range of preprint services. Importantly, it is not owned by a commercial publisher. It supports a number of discipline-specific preprint services many of which use the ArXiv name under licence.

The list of preprint services is growing over time. For further information go to: https://osf.io/preprints

In general, no matter what the discipline you can post to OSF preprints: https://osf.io/preprints/

More discipline-specific preprint services using the OSF framework are being added on a regular basis: https://cos.io/blog/public-goods-infrastructure-preprints-and-innovation-scholarly-communication/

Useful features of OSF-based preprint services

  • Strategy for long term archiving
  • Integration with Google Scholar
  • Integration with OSF projects which allows you to link other materials such as data, code, and materials
  • OSF is a not for profit entity run by academic researchers (contrast this with SSRN, Figshare, ResearchGate; i.e., no ads and goals aligned with academic community)
  • The functionality of OSF preprints is improving on a regular basis. See features road map
  • You can choose a licence
  • You can link to the DOI of the subsequently published manuscript.
Improve this answer
1
  • Nice to know about OSF.
    – Nav
    Commented Sep 1, 2020 at 12:23

You must log in to answer this question.