Re: Elsevier's ChemWeb Preprint Archive
Dear Jim, My apologies for the delay replying to your message. As I announced recently in a separate message (http://listserver.sigmaxi.org/sc/wa.exe?A2=ind01&L=september98-forum&F=l&S= &P=67394) I am very pleased to inform participants of this forum that the CPS is now fully compliant with the Open Archives Initiative protocol. Registration details may be viewed at http://www.openarchives.org/Register/BrowseSites.pl. Thank you for your other questions and comments. I have responded to these below. In the previous message you wrote: > [jw]> For the "sign-posting" criterion, I agree that it is important to > [jw]> provide authors with the ability to link to the published version. > [snip] > [jw]> After the first version of the preprint has been submitted, the > [jw]> author (and only the author) is presented with three hyperlinks when > [jw]> they access their article page: 1) Add more supplementary files; > [jw]> 2) Revise the full text of the preprint; 3) Redirect to the > [jw]> published article. This redirection is achieved using the LitLink > [jw]> technology of MDL Information Systems. > > If I understand correctly, these options are not mutually-exclusive? The author may add more supplementary files or revise the full text of the preprint at any time during the research process. These options are indeed not mutually exclusive. However, once access to the final version has been redirected, authors are no longer able to revise the full-text of the article further, or add more supplementary files. > You then commented (re the 3rd option): > > [jw]> When users then view the article page, they are presented with a > [jw]> "Published full text" link. When this link is accessed, LitLink > [jw]> resolves the citation and finds from where the article may be > [jw]> downloaded. Clearly, if this is from a publisher's website, users > [jw]> would typically have to pay for access. However, all of the other > [jw]> information - including the preprint meta-data and any other files > [jw]> uploaded to the server - do of course remain completely free to > [jw]> access on the CPS. > > So, if authors choose the 3rd option, a link to the published version is > added to the preprint that's posted at the CPS. Am I correct to conclude > that, when the 3rd option is chosen by an author, the original full text > of the preprint (plus any supplementary files) can still be accessed on > the CPS? Yes, the original version and all supplementary files remain fully-accessible after access to the final version has been redirected. Some authors have also uploaded versions of the full-text article into the supplementary files section. This could include, for example, an HTML version of the full-text which is created in PDF format as standard. > Can you easily measure what proportion of authors have (so far) chosen the > 3rd option? Of those authors whose preprints that have subsequently been > published in the peer-reviewed literature, I wonder what proportion have > chosen the 3rd option, what proportion have added the relevant hyperlink > into the discussion thread for their own preprint, and what proportion > have done nothing about providing a link to the published version? I have looked through the preprints posted to date and 11 of the 333 articles have had the access redirected. It is more difficult to judge how many more have gone on to be published. However, I have seen a number of author comments such as "This paper has been submitted to..." and "This paper has now been published in... and you may also access the published version at...". It would certainly be very interesting to investigate this further. I hope that these comments have helped to answer your questions. I would of course welcome more questions, comments or opinions on the Chemistry Preprint Server from any participant of this forum. Best regards, James James Weeks Chemistry Preprint Server Coordinator, ChemWeb Inc. 84 Theobald's Road London WC1X 8RR United Kingdom Tel:+44 (0) 20 7611 4480 Fax:+44 (0) 20 7611 4301 Email: james.we...@chemweb.com Web:http://www.chemweb.com, http://preprint.chemweb.com ___
Re: Elsevier's ChemWeb Preprint Archive
I am very pleased to announce that the Chemistry Preprint Server (CPS) - http://preprint.chemweb.com - is now compliant with version 1.1 of the Open Archives Initiative (OAI) protocol. Registration details may be viewed on the OAI site - http://www.openarchives.org/Register/BrowseSites.pl. It has been a high priority to achieve compliance with the OAI because ChemWeb has continually developed the CPS as a service for the worldwide chemical community. We would of course welcome any feedback or comments on the service. Best regards, James Weeks [Questions and comments regarding the CPS have been posted to various lists. For this reason please forgive any cross-posting.] __ James Weeks Chemistry Preprint Server Coordinator ChemWeb Inc. 84 Theobald's Road London WC1X 8RR United Kingdom Tel:+44 (0) 20 7611 4480 Fax:+44 (0) 20 7611 4301 Email: james.we...@chemweb.com http://preprint.chemweb.com http://www.chemweb.com _
Re: Elsevier's ChemWeb Preprint Archive
Dear Jim,
Thank you very much for your questions and interest in the CPS.
The CPS should indeed satisfy the "inter-operability" criterion when we
achieve compliance with the Open Archives Initiative. It is our intention
that the CPS will be compliant at the start of October.
I also agree that the "views" and "ranking" statistics could provide
indicators for the impact of a particular preprint. By a "citation data"
indicator, I understand that the impact would be ascertained by examining
the number of other papers (both inside and outside the server) which cite
that preprint. This is an interesting idea and I would certainly like to
like to learn more about how this could be achieved.
For the "sign-posting" criterion, I agree that it is important to provide
authors with the ability to link to the published version. As you mention,
this is currently possible by adding the relevant hyperlink into the
discussion group of a particular preprint.
I would like to add that authors of preprints submitted to the CPS also have
the option to redirect the final version of the preprint to the final
version on the publisher's website, if and when the preprint is published.
After the first version of the preprint has been submitted, the author (and
only the author) is presented with three hyperlinks when they access their
article page: 1) Add more supplementary files; 2) Revise the full text of
the preprint; 3) Redirect to the published article. This redirection is
achieved using the LitLink technology of MDL Information Systems. The author
would submit the ISSN of the journal, the year, volume and starting page
number. When users then view the article page, they are presented with a
"Published full text" link. When this link is accessed, LitLink resolves
the citation and finds from where the article may be downloaded. Clearly, if
this is from a publisher's website, users would typically have to pay for
access. However, all of the other information - including the preprint
meta-data and any other files uploaded to the server - do of course remain
completely free to access on the CPS.
In terms of this "sign-posting", I do think that it is equally important
that other authors link back to references which appear on preprint servers.
Every article that is uploaded to the CPS is given its own citation
reference in the form CPS: category/YYMMNNN where 'category' is the
chemistry classification to which the preprint was submitted, 'YY' is the
year, 'MM' the month, and 'NNN' represents the number of preprints submitted
to that category in the month. In a similar manner, the article is also
given a "friendly URL" - http://preprint.chemweb.com/category/YYMMNNN. If a
user accesses this URL they are taken directly to the article, without
having to first browse through the server. In this way, it is easy for
authors to reference the CPS preprints.
I hope that this helps to clarify. Any suggestions or comments would of
course be very welcome.
Kind regards,
James
James Weeks
Chemistry Preprint Server Coordinator
ChemWeb Inc.
84 Theobald's Road
London WC1X 8RR
United Kingdom
Tel:+44 (0) 20 7611 4480
Fax:+44 (0) 20 7611 4301
Email: james.we...@chemweb.com
http://preprint.chemweb.com
http://www.chemweb.com
___
-Original Message-
From: Jim Till [mailto:t...@uhnres.utoronto.ca]
Sent: 24 August 2001 19:10
To: american-scientist-open-access-fo...@listserver.sigmaxi.org
Subject: Re: Elsevier's ChemWeb Preprint Archive
A comment in response to previous messages from James Weeks:
In a message that I posted to this forum on 24 May 2001, on the subject
"Re: ClinMed NetPrints", I tried to outline three criteria (or, 'design &
usability guidelines'?) for an eprint archive:
1) an 'inter-operability' criterion;
2) an 'impact-ranking' criterion;
3) a 'sign-posting' criterion.
James, in the message that you posted to this forum on August 17, you
indicated that there are plans for the Chemistry Preprint Server (CPS) to
be OAI-compliant with the next two months. If that goal is accomplished,
the first ('inter-operability') criterion will (I assume) have been met.
Perhaps one way to begin the meet the second ('impact-ranking') criterion
is to provide the kind of "views" and "ranking" indicators that are
commented upon in the message that you posted on August 23.
Better, though, might be the suitability of the eprint server for yielding
citation data? As Tim Brody pointed out (as part of a previous thread, in
a message posted on May 24, on the subject: "Re: ClinMed NetPrints"):
[tb]> Which, from my technical point of view, is the reference lists for
[tb]> the articles. As far as I'm aware no archives currently do this (I
[tb]> know cogprints provides the facility for authors to give this
[tb]> information, but does not re-export yet). Watch developmen
Re: Elsevier's ChemWeb Preprint Archive
Dear Jim, Thank you very much for your response. To date, I haven't noticed any particular effort to increase the number of discussion threads. In fact, I think more noticeable inaccuracies could occur from "test" threads and reproduced threads. I suppose these effects might become less significant as the discussions grow but in this sense I agree that the other indicators might be more reliable. In my opinion, the most robust indicators of subsequent publication would indeed be "views" and "ranking". In fact, the articles with the most discussion could be those which are still works-in-progress or which are more controversial. We monitor the views on the number of unique users who have viewed the article. Therefore, it really should not be possible to manipulate this data. Similarly, authors are not permitted to rank their own article and users can only rank an article once. I hope that this helps to clarify. Best regards, James James Weeks Chemistry Preprint Server Coordinator ChemWeb Inc. 84 Theobald's Road London WC1X 8RR United Kingdom Tel:+44 (0) 20 7611 4480 Fax:+44 (0) 20 7611 4301 Email: james.we...@chemweb.com http://preprint.chemweb.com http://www.chemweb.com ___ -Original Message- From: Jim Till [mailto:t...@uhnres.utoronto.ca] Sent: 19 August 2001 12:29 To: american-scientist-open-access-fo...@listserver.sigmaxi.org Subject: Re: Elsevier's ChemWeb Preprint Archive On Fri, 17 Aug 2001, James Weeks wrote [in part]: [jw]> each article that is submitted to the CPS has its own discussion [jw]> group where users can comment on the content of the article. It [jw]> is encouraging that there has been sustained use of these [jw]> discussion groups. For example, 45 of the 282 preprints submitted [jw]> now have more than 3 threads in their discussions. I think it will [jw]> also be interesting to monitor how this feature is used. Of the three indicators now available via CPS (views per preprint, score on a 1-5 scale, and number of discussion threads), it's not clear to me which indicator might be the least susceptible to manipulation. All seem quite vulnerable to such manipulation. If any of these three indicators is found to be a reasonably reliable and valid predictor of subsequent publication in a "brand name" journal, then its vulnerability to attempts at manipulation (e.g. via deliberate attempts to initiate more discussion threads) might become a major concern. I'd be very interested in any comments that you may have about this "manipulation issue". [jw]> It is our intention that the CPS will be [OAI] compliant within the [jw]> next two months. Good news! Jim Till University of Toronto
Re: Elsevier's ChemWeb Preprint Archive
Questions and comments regarding the CPS have been cross-posted by list
owners to various other relevant lists. For this reason please forgive this
similar cross-posting in response.
This message is posted to:
{american-scientist-open-access-fo...@listserver.sigmaxi.org, chem...@ic.ac.uk,
oai-gene...@oaisrv.nsdl.cornell.edu}
Firstly, I would like to thank everybody for their comments regarding the
evolution of the Chemistry Preprint Server (CPS). I would like to briefly
address some of the points that have been raised.
Jim Till has provided some very revealing analysis of the submissions to the
CPS
(http://listserver.sigmaxi.org/scripts/wa.exe?A2=ind01&L=september98-forum&F
=l&P=29519). It will certainly be interesting to repeat this analysis when
more preprints have been submitted.
To this, I would like to add that each article that is submitted to the CPS
has its own discussion group where users can comment on the content of the
article. It is encouraging that there has been sustained use of these
discussion groups. For example, 45 of the 282 preprints submitted now have
more than 3 threads in their discussions. I think it will also be
interesting to monitor how this feature is used.
Regarding the issue of compliance with the Open Archives Initiative (OAI) I
would like to confirm that we have constantly referred to the initiative
when developing the CPS. This is certainly a high priority because
ChemWeb.com has developed the CPS as a service for the worldwide chemistry
community.
It is our intention that the CPS will be compliant within the next two
months.
I hope that this has helped to address some of the issues raised. We would
of course welcome any feedback or comments on the service.
Please do not hesitate to contact me personally if you have any queries or
comments.
Best regards,
James Weeks
__
James Weeks
Chemistry Preprint Server Coordinator
ChemWeb Inc.
84 Theobald's Road
London WC1X 8RR
United Kingdom
Tel:+44 (0) 20 7611 4480
Fax:+44 (0) 20 7611 4301
Email: james.we...@chemweb.com
http://preprint.chemweb.com
http://www.chemweb.com
Meet us at the ACS National Meeting - Chicago - August 27-29 - Booth 337
__
Re: Elsevier's ChemWeb Preprint Archive
Dear Stevan, Thank you very much for your detailed comments. We would be happy for you to use them in a discussion. However, I would first like to clarify a few points regarding our policies, which we hope you would also add into the discussion. In general, we do agree with your comments. But this is not an ideal world. The reason we give authors the option to use LitLink is to encourage submissions in the early phases of the project. Also, the ability to redirect to the published article is indeed optional. We hope that after a year or so, chemistry publishers will follow suit with those in physics and not restrict the post-publication of preprints in their journals. This is the mindset that we are hoping to change. In doing so, we would very much like to see preprints that have been published remain accessible on the server. Hopefully, chemistry authors, like those in physics, will soon change their mentality too. It should be noted that we are also working towards a permanently (and freely) accessible archive. The CPS has applied to be recognised as a compliant data provider by the Open Archives Initiative by complying with the Sante Fe Convention. We hope that our archive will soon be indexed and "harvestable" by other preprint servers. We were indeed interested to learn about the Harnad/Oppenheim strategy. This may need some thought on our behalf! Once again, thank you for your comments and Bryan sends his best wishes. Best regards, James James Weeks Chemistry Preprint Server Coordinator ChemWeb, Inc. 84 Theobald's Road London, WC1X 8RR United Kingdom Email: james.we...@chemweb.com Direct Tel: +44 (0) 20 7611 4480 Main Tel: +44 (0) 20 7611 4300 Fax:+44 (0) 20 7611 4301 Internet: http://www.ChemWeb.com
Re: Elsevier's ChemWeb Preprint Archive
Dear Stevan, Thank you for your comments. You have raised some very interesting issues which we too have been thinking about for the Chemistry Preprint Server (CPS). First of all, I think it is important to note that we also believe that the preprint server should act as a permanent archive of submitted articles. Chemists often communicate in different ways to many other scientists and to achieve our goals we are slowly having to change the mindset of chemists. Many chemistry publishers, however, are a potential barrier to the concept of preprints in chemistry. Many will not accept papers for submission which have already been preprinted elsewhere, and others will not accept the paper if it remains available in any other form. What we had initially planned to do, and in fact what we are doing, is only allowing the author to remove the full text of his/her paper if they provide details for us to create a hyperlink to an online version of the published article. This is done via software created by our sister company, MDL, called LitLink. All of the other details concerning the original submission to CPS, including the author name, affiliation, article title, abstract, and also the discussion about that article remain accessible on the CPS. Furthermore, the original articles are never erased from the server and can be used to contest issues of prior art. There is also nothing to stop an author posting an article on the CPS which has been submitted, refereed, accepted or even rejected by a journal publisher. The CPS policy is simply not to accept an article where the copyright has already been transferred to a publisher, unless that publisher supports the CPS. I hope these comments help to explain our policies. We would of course be most happy for you to comment further on the CPS, and maybe discuss it with you further. Bryan Vickery, Community Development Manager of ChemWeb.com will be attending the International Chemical Information Conference in Annecy this month, where I believe you are speaking. Best wishes, James
