# 25 years of arXiv, a timeline – arXiv public wiki – Dashboard

“Looking back at arXiv’s 25 years (and forward to Open Repositories, next week!), I read through all the old arXiv news on the arXiv.org website, as well as Paul Ginsparg’s recent “Preprint Déjà Vu: an FAQ,” and put together this timeline (PDF). It’s really interesting to note the start up of additional subject area services at other institutions (and their later consolidation to LANL), the addition of new subject areas, the start up and decommissioning of mirrors, and a lot of other arXiv milestones. It’s an idiosyncratic summary, but it was fun to put together. Enjoy.”

# arxivist

“The arxivist uses your preferences to sort arXiv articles — making it easier to find new arXiv submissions that are pertinent to you….”

# ScienceOpen is a resource for the community – ScienceOpen Blog

“We harvest content from across platforms like PubMed Central, arXiv, SciELO and bring it all together in one place

One of the main features of ScienceOpen is that we are a research aggregator. We don’t select what we index based on discipline, publisher, or geography, as that just creates another silo. Enough of those exist already. What we need, and what we do, is to bring together research articles from across publishers and other platforms and into one space, where it is all treated in exactly the same way….”

# 2018-2022: Sustainability Plan for Classic arXiv – arXiv public wiki – Dashboard

“Since 2010, Cornell’s sustainability planning initiative has aimed to reduce arXiv’s financial burden and dependence on a single institution, instead creating a broad-based, community-supported resource. arXiv’s funding and governance for the current operation (Classic arXiv) is based on a membership program engaging libraries and research laboratories worldwide that represent the repository’s heaviest institutional users. As of February 2017, we have 206 members representing 25 countries. arXiv’s sustainability plan is founded on and presents a business model for generating revenues and a set of governance, editorial, and financial principles. Cornell University Library (CUL), the Simons Foundation, and a global collective of institutional members support arXiv financially. The financial model for 2013–2017 entails three sources of revenues:

• CUL provides a cash subsidy of $75,000 per year in support of arXiv’s operational costs. In addition, CUL makes an in-kind contribution of all indirect costs, which currently represents 37% of total operating expenses. • The Simons Foundation contributes$100,000 per year ($50,000 prior to 2016) in recognition of CUL’s stewardship of arXiv. In addition, the Foundation matches$300,000 per year of the funds generated through arXiv membership fees.

• Each member institution pledges a five-year funding commitment to support arXiv. Based on institutional usage ranking, the annual fees are set in four tiers from $1,500 to$3,000.

In 2016, Cornell raised approximately $515,000 through membership fees from 201 institutions and the total revenue (including CUL, Simons Foundation direct contributions, and online fundraising) is around$1,015,000. We remain grateful for the support from the Simons Foundation that encouraged long-term community support by lowering arXiv membership fees and making participation affordable to a broad range of institutions. This model aims to ensure that the ultimate responsibility for sustaining arXiv remains with the research communities and institutions that benefit from the service most directly.”

# Open science: The findings of medical research are disseminated too slowly | The Economist

ON JANUARY 1st the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation did something that may help to change the practice of science. It brought into force a policy, foreshadowed two years earlier, that research it supports (it is the world’s biggest source of charitable money for scientific endeavours, to the tune of some \$4bn a year) must, when published, be freely available to all. On March 23rd it followed this up by announcing that it will pay the cost of putting such research in one particular repository of freely available papers.

# INSPIRE-HEP

“CERN, DESY, Fermilab and SLAC have built the next-generation High Energy Physics (HEP) information system, INSPIRE. It combines the successful SPIRES database content, curated at DESY, Fermilab and SLAC, with the Invenio digital library technology developed at CERN. INSPIRE is run by a collaboration of CERN, DESY, Fermilab, IHEP, and SLAC, and interacts closely with HEP publishers, arXiv.org, NASA-ADS, PDG, HEPDATA and other information resources.

INSPIRE represents a natural evolution of scholarly communication, built on successful community-based information systems, and provides a vision for information management in other fields of science….”

# SciPost:

• Two-way open access
Publicly-funded science should be openly accessible to scientists and the general public, perpetually, worldwide. Conversely, scientists should not have to pay publishing charges to disseminate the fruits of their research efforts.
• Non-profit
Academics do not perform research for profit, and by extension the publication of their scientific results should not involve commercial profit-making.
• By Professionals
Scientists should carry the final responsibility for all stages in the scientific publishing process.
• Peer-witnessed refereeing
Scientific publications should undergo the strictest possible peer refereeing process, witnessed by the community instead of hidden behind closed doors.
• Accountable and credited refereeing
Peer refereeing should be accountable, and should be incentivized by being credited.
• Post-publication evaluation
Peer evaluation does not stop at the moment of publication.

# Top arXiv papers

We’re a free and open access scientific collaboration network.

• Follow arXiv.org categories and see the highest ranked new papers
• Scite papers and subscribe to categories