Dear Marta, your msage does not contemplate the arXiv under the role I gave it in my msage. For me, in that msage, the arXiv is only considered as a meduim to broadcast your work. Only that. On 03/09/11 07:46, Marta Bunge wrote:
Dear Eduardo,
I, too, consult ArXiv quite often, but I do so knowing that the articles in question are unrefereed preprints, as are lectures.
perfect,whai is the problem ?
This may be stimulating but, even as a way to establish priority, it is quite dubious.
I was not thinking at all as a way to establish priority
For instance, in ArXiv, one has the possibility of updating a posting, and so correct mistakes or add comments received privately. I do not know if the new postings replace the old one or coexists with it.
and so, you read the arXive to see if it is useful for your work. You have to read the proofs to see if the statements are true. YOU are the referee in a way.
The referee system has its drawbacks, but it is normally of use, not only to the readers and institutions, but also to the author(s). Posting in ArXiv should always be followed by a publication in a refereed journal, but it not always is.
Yes, so as to make any good in your curriculum, the higher the impact factor (or ISI or whatever) the better. But it is completely IRRELEVANT for those that will actually understand and use your work. !! . As for the referee trouble, yes, I agree many times it is useful for both ends.
As for journals in which the costs of publishing are nil, we categorists have the fortune of having a reputable journal such as TAC where to send our papers. In this I totally agree with Mike Barr. Cahiers is, to a lesser extent perhaps, another such instance, and it can now be accessed electronically (Numdam). There are also refereed proceedings of festshrifts or conferences which may not be rated as high as some journals, but which are part of our community life and, in some sense, a duty that we have towards our respected colleagues. As for high cost journals, I once signed a pledge not to publish in any Elsevier journal, and advertised my action in categories. Several people in this forum thought this was stupid, but others praised me. It is a matter of conscience. I do not have a solution, but asking libraries to stop subscribing to prestigious journals is in my view utopic.
Probably,
I already suggested requesting funding agencies and university policy makers to give higher ratings to journals which deserve to be so considered, particularly when the author gives reasons for choosing such journals rather than the high end ones.
This is also utopic. If I said I do not publish this paper in Annals of mathematics, which I can perfectly do, by a matter of conscience, It is clear that for nobody in any evaluation comitee (even by peers) this declaration will have any value.
Finally, I (and so, anyone) can access ArXiv postings without any problem- it is not hard to locate what one wants to read in them. An excellent source of information, but it could never replace refereed journals.
Depends for what? . When the matter is to make your work known, it is even better than refereed journals. Actually, I think the first reason and "raison d'etre" of the journals at the time if their creation (19 th century or before) was the diffusion of correct knowledge. Now it has degenerate in curriculum build up. To diffusion of knowledge (right or wrong) we have the arXiv. The interested reader is its own referee. What is the problem ?. To utilize results (trusting a referee) without having taken the trouble to verify and understand the proofs it is not a good way to do mathematics. So, why care if the paper has been refereed or not ?
Regards,
Marta
many regards e.d.
[For admin and other information see: http://www.mta.ca/~cat-dist/ ]