Ask HN: ArXiv Endorsement as Independent Researcher
9 comments
Recently went through this. Not exactly an independent researcher, but my current field (ML) is different from my educational field (physics), so needed to get someone to endorse me so I could upload a paper to cs.CV
I asked someone who organised a workshop I had spoken at. If you haven't met anyone in the field, then look at the papers you cite, see if any of the authors of those papers can endorse you (you can see it at the bottom of a paper's ArXiv abstract page), and ask them.
I asked someone who organised a workshop I had spoken at. If you haven't met anyone in the field, then look at the papers you cite, see if any of the authors of those papers can endorse you (you can see it at the bottom of a paper's ArXiv abstract page), and ask them.
Thanks a lot for this hint, I'll definitely look into it. Seems to be the only option. I was able to "publish" it to SSRN [1] but not sure it has the credibility I'm looking for.
[1]https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=5910263
[1]https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=5910263
ArXiv doesn't give your paper any credibility either.
If you want credibility, submit it to a journal. Journals don't require that the paper be on ArXiv.
The reason I submitted our paper to ArXiv was that it was accepted at a workshop that was peer-reviewed, but non-archival, so just wanted to be able to point people at something a little easier to reference than the workshop github page.
If you want credibility, submit it to a journal. Journals don't require that the paper be on ArXiv.
The reason I submitted our paper to ArXiv was that it was accepted at a workshop that was peer-reviewed, but non-archival, so just wanted to be able to point people at something a little easier to reference than the workshop github page.
> for peer review
ArXiv is not for peer review, it's just for publishing.
I've seen a lot of post from Zenodo, but most of them were bad.
[I have no arXiv account anyway.]
ArXiv is not for peer review, it's just for publishing.
I've seen a lot of post from Zenodo, but most of them were bad.
[I have no arXiv account anyway.]
> ArXiv is not for peer review, it's just for publishing.
I understand that but unless I publish my preprint somewhere it's hard to submit for review.
I understand that but unless I publish my preprint somewhere it's hard to submit for review.
In math and physics, you just upload the pdf to the webpage of the journal and then the editor wisely decides what to do. It's not necesary to upload it elsewhere.
Can you share more about why it's hard to submit the preprint for review unless its first published somewhere? Wouldn't you be able to submit the preprint directly to whichever conference or journal you want it published in?
For a different way to receive feedback for a preprint consider [url-redacted]. I created it partly out of frustration for the time it takes to publish smaller work. Although not currently implemented, I can provide a version that keeps review comments private.
For a different way to receive feedback for a preprint consider [url-redacted]. I created it partly out of frustration for the time it takes to publish smaller work. Although not currently implemented, I can provide a version that keeps review comments private.
That’s what I did when I was still at Uni. Unfortunately it’s quite hard without any associations.
How does your platform work in an academic context?
How does your platform work in an academic context?
[deleted]
[1] https://static.philippdubach.com/pdf/Attention_Dynamics_in_Online_Communities_Power_Laws__Preferential_Attachment__and_Early_Success_Prediction_on_Hacker_News.pdf