36

One of the main criticism against arXiv is that while there is some basic filtering, but there is no scientific review of the papers. I wonder whether adding a comment section has already being discussed publicly and why as of now arXiv does not have a comment section.

Franck Dernoncourt
  • 33,669
  • 27
  • 144
  • 313
  • 34
    Probably because it would be hard to filter out all the loonies who do "theoretical physics" as a hobby, know how to prove that P != NP, have their own theory of everything, etc. Comments would quickly degenerate to the level of what you could find in physics newsgroups on USENET (when it was still popular). Most people commenting wouldn't be those who actually understand what the paper is about. – Szabolcs Nov 27 '14 at 15:52
  • 3
    Short answer: the people who run arXiv don't have the time, money, or appetite. But there are some efforts by other people to implement something like this. Have you seen this? https://selectedpapers.net/ – Lazzaro Campeotti Nov 27 '14 at 15:58
  • 2
    @ArtiePrendergast-Smith: Another is http://pubpeer.com. – Nate Eldredge Nov 27 '14 at 17:02
  • 7
    Go to http://harvardmagazine.com/2003/07/who-built-the-pyramids-html. Look at the comments. Do you still want to see comments on arXiv? – rumtscho Nov 27 '14 at 21:42
  • @rumtscho Obviously comments would be somehow moderated, and maybe not anonymous, amongst other thrash filters. – Franck Dernoncourt Nov 27 '14 at 21:47
  • 33
    "there is no scientific review of the papers" -- and what exactly did you expect from a preprint server? It's clear arxiv was meant to be a repository of papers; when did it purport to facilitate discussion? –  Nov 27 '14 at 23:05
  • This question appears to be off-topic because it is about ArXiv's policies and features, not academia. – David Richerby Nov 27 '14 at 23:06
  • @DavidRicherby I suggest you explore the arxiv tag. – Franck Dernoncourt Nov 27 '14 at 23:29
  • There is a browser extension to store and view arXiv comments at https://fermatslibrary.com/librarian .

    I have also suggested to arXiv that they include an optional link to submit feedback to the authors of papers. The authors could enable and disable the link themselves.

     – David Spector Nov 27 '19 at 19:04
  • 2
    @Szabolcs Disagree. For all types of academic publications, including but not limiting to articles, comments, and correspondence, anyone has to attach his name with it. It is easy to detect trolls. – High GPA Feb 16 '20 at 07:02

5 Answers5

26

http://www.nature.com/news/arxiv-preprint-server-plans-multimillion-dollar-overhaul-1.20181 (published on 29 June 2016) has some interesting statistics on whether users want a comment section:

enter image description here

When asked whether arXiv should embark on more transformational changes, respondents gave mixed answers. In particular, some questions focused on whether it should develop into a social forum that allows scientists to comment on papers or leave ratings. A few social-media sites have already been built around the repository for just such purposes — such as SciRate and Arxiv Sanity Preserver — and some argue that the site itself should begin to incorporate such functionalities. “ArXiv should be more dynamic — allowing readers to filter the wheat from the chaff,” says Alán Aspuru-Guzik, a quantum chemist at Harvard University in Cambridge, Massachusetts. But one-third of respondents said that this wasn’t important or that arXiv shouldn’t be doing it. Only 34% voted in favour of such changes.

That response points to a tension between researchers who want to see the site incorporate aspects of open review, and those who want it to stick to its core mission of allowing rapid exchange of scholarly papers, says Rieger. There were hints of a generational divide, with those aged under 30 more in favour of allowing comments. But even those who wanted a more social site said that they were keen to avoid a commenting free-for-all, Rieger adds.

“The message was more or less ‘stay focused on the basic dissemination task, and don’t get distracted by getting overextended or going commercial’,” says Paul Ginsparg, a physicist at Cornell University who launched arXiv in 1991 as a pre-World-Wide-Web-era bulletin board.

Interestingly, bioRxiv does have a comment section, e.g. from https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/332825v2:

enter image description here

Similarly, Hugging Face allows users to comments on arXiv papers e.g. https://huggingface.co/papers/2309.09400:

enter image description here

Franck Dernoncourt
  • 33,669
  • 27
  • 144
  • 313
24
  • Comment systems cost money to develop and moderate.
  • Some people may not want their preprint commented on.
  • You can comment by submitting your own preprint.
  • Third-party sites provide this service.
  • Journals do not not have comment sections on their websites.
  • I doubt many people are asking for a comment section.
Anonymous Physicist
  • 98,828
  • 24
  • 203
  • 351
  • 8
    Do you have any evidence for your claims? Especially the last one. – Ali Caglayan Nov 27 '14 at 17:43
  • 3
    @alizter People seldom create evidence detailing why they don't do something. Any answers here are likely to be pure conjecture, unless somebody from arXiv comes and says "We discussed it and decided against it because X", or we happen to find a record of one of them saying such a thing. – rumtscho Nov 27 '14 at 21:45
  • 4
    @Alizter No, it's opinion. As is most of the stuff on this site. If you want facts about ArXiv go ask them. http://arxiv.org/help/contact – Anonymous Physicist Nov 27 '14 at 22:58
  • Regarding your last point: Reference on the authors' willingness to receive public, online feedback on their work. – Franck Dernoncourt Nov 28 '14 at 05:11
  • 10
    @Alizter All of these points are directly verifiable by anyone, except for the last one (which is stated as an opinion). It's a bit weird to ask for sources for something like "Comment systems cost money to develop and moderate" or "Journals do not not have comment sections on their websites"... –  Nov 28 '14 at 07:38
  • @Najib I only wanted to know the justification for the points. Whether they are from arXiv or purely skeptical. Sorry if this was a bit of a strange thing to ask but as a user of this site I wanted to know a bit more about what I was reading. – Ali Caglayan Nov 28 '14 at 08:12
  • @AnonymousPhysicist Wong! both Nature and Science, the two big academic journals, do have the web-comment section. – High GPA Feb 16 '20 at 07:03
4

The idea of adding comments in some form (not 'on the arXiv' directly) has had some public discussion. See Tim Gower's blog post Why I've also joined the good guys. Sadly I've seen very little of the idea since, so I don't know what the current state-of-play is.

Jessica B
  • 15,968
  • 3
  • 46
  • 69
1

There is no need for a comment section. The authors have provided their contact information, so you can email them directly with any feedback you have for them.

PLOS has comments, though: http://www.plosone.org/static/commentGuidelines.

When they're used, they don't generate much discussion, so maybe arXiv has guessed right about the user demand for them. http://www.plosone.org/article/comments/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0105948

Akka Demic
  • 207
  • 1
  • 2
  • 11
    Readers can benefit from other readers' comments. – Franck Dernoncourt Nov 27 '14 at 22:03
  • 2
    @FranckDernoncourt True. But perhaps arXiv just doesn't include that in its problem scope. It's focussed on authors, and their work. – Akka Demic Nov 27 '14 at 22:04
  • 1
    @FranckDernoncourt But, maybe I'm making assumptions about why you would like a comment section. What would you use it for? – Akka Demic Nov 27 '14 at 22:07
  • Ask for clarifications, point to other related work, miscellaneous questions, etc. (such a a comment section could be organized into categories by the way). But beyond personal points of view I was mostly curious to know whether the arXiv team had made their views public about that matter. (by the way, thanks for the interesting links!) – Franck Dernoncourt Nov 28 '14 at 05:15
  • 3
    Make clarifications and point out errors in the paper or things that are misleading or misguided would be of great benefit to other readers. – HelloGoodbye Jan 26 '16 at 12:14
0

It's been a while since this post, but this idea is now available at https://alphaxiv.org/

This is a Stanford site that allows you to search for and add comments to any arxiv document. I am not affiliated in any way with the website.

Most submissions have 0 comments right now, but open a famous paper like “Attention is all you need” for a proper demonstration

Ariel Lubonja
  • 9
  • 2
  • Thanks! Huggingface is doing that too eg https://huggingface.co/papers/2309.09400 If arXiv doesn't want to support comments, people will just use other platforms. – Franck Dernoncourt Dec 30 '23 at 18:40
  • Do you have an association with this website? https://academia.stackexchange.com/help/promotion – user176372 Dec 30 '23 at 18:40
  • 2
    In fact, after some investigation, I'm unable to figure out any site owner. There's no About page. The site uses a Stanford logo in a way that implies affiliation, but does not appear to be registered by them. The site's JavaScript has been run through a typical obfuscation algorithm and serves all the site's content. Is there a reason to trust this site? – user176372 Dec 30 '23 at 19:13
  • 1
    @user176372 According to a post on LinkedIn, the connection appears to be that the site was at least created by Stanford students. – Anyon Dec 30 '23 at 21:58
  • Hi! Could you please add more details about the website to make this answer more complete? For example, including any information about the maintainers would be appreciated. – The Doctor Dec 31 '23 at 00:35
  • I am not affiliated in any way with the website. I don’t have any more information on who owns it past what the website already says – Ariel Lubonja Jan 01 '24 at 00:07