On arXiv moderation system

Z.K. Silagadze

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2023.101433

2023-07-23

Abstract:The advent of arXiv has revolutionized scientific communication. However, its cultural significance goes far beyond simply accelerating scholarly communication. The arXiv gave a powerful impetus to the democratization of science, freeing young scientists and not only, especially from totalitarian countries, from authoritarian oppression. Many of arXiv's innovative features have been blurred by the introduction of a moderation system. Without a doubt, a moderation system is essential to maintain the quality of arXiv content. However, I believe that it can be improved in line with arXiv's original intentions, using the very successful experience of the MathOverflow moderation system.

Physics and Society

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

The paper attempts to address the issue of how the review system of the arXiv preprint server can ensure the quality and reliability of content while maintaining academic freedom. Specifically, the authors believe that although the current review system helps maintain the quality of arXiv's content, it also introduces some limitations that affect the openness and democracy of academic communication. The authors propose that the successful experience of MathOverflow can be used to improve arXiv's review mechanism, making it more flexible and efficient without sacrificing content quality.

The main issues include:
1. **Limitations of the review system**: The current review system (such as the endorsement system) may hinder the publication of research results from new researchers or non-mainstream viewpoints, affecting academic freedom.
2. **Ensuring content quality**: While the review system helps filter out pseudoscience and low-quality content, excessive review may suppress innovation and diversity.
3. **Community participation**: The authors suggest establishing a community review system based on user reputation to increase user participation, making the review process more transparent and democratic.

The authors hope that by improving the review system, arXiv can better balance academic freedom and content quality, promoting the healthy development of science.