The quirks of arXiv

The physics preprint archive arXiv is an excellent resource save for one thing.  To post to the archive one uploads a paper, which normally becomes available for anyone to view the next day (you can make changes up to the cutoff time if you need to).  The process works thus for ordinary, humdrum papers, but papers with new ideas are liable to be caught by the rigid mechanism devised by the archive's founder, intended to maintain standards by blocking the upload of junk papers.

Whereas with journals a competent human being examines papers in detail to assess their quality, arXiv uses a makeshift two-stage mechanism intended to process in quick time the large numbers of submissions made every day.  Stage one is an automated process using an algorithm trained on conventional papers but, as is well known, the behaviour of algorithms is very dependent on the training sample, and papers that are unusual in any way are liable to be rejected.  Submissions rejected by the algorithm are normally forwarded to human moderators for the section concerned who make their own quick assessment, a process not involving careful assessment.  If the arguments in the paper are easy to follow then fine; otherwise, especially if a moderator has problems following the details in view of their novelty, the submission is liable either to be rejected, or to be 'dumped' in a special area called general physics, at the same time being marked 'unsuitable for cross-listing', as a result denying the person submitting the paper concerned the possibility of having the abstract included in the daily mailing for the relevant subject area.  The fact that a paper has already been refereed and published by a journal apparently makes little difference: moderators are king.

This kind of situation is ripe for the exercise of moderator prejudice.  Once upon a time, Nature kindly published my comments on the situation under the subtitle 'Putting control in the hands of a few can enforce orthodoxy and stifle innovative ideas'.  Nothing changed at arXiv following this adverse comment, and there are many with good ideas who have fallen foul of the system.