Quantcast
  • Register
PhysicsOverflow is a next-generation academic platform for physicists and astronomers, including a community peer review system and a postgraduate-level discussion forum analogous to MathOverflow.

Welcome to PhysicsOverflow! PhysicsOverflow is an open platform for community peer review and graduate-level Physics discussion.

Please help promote PhysicsOverflow ads elsewhere if you like it.

News

PO is now at the Physics Department of Bielefeld University!

New printer friendly PO pages!

Migration to Bielefeld University was successful!

Please vote for this year's PhysicsOverflow ads!

Please do help out in categorising submissions. Submit a paper to PhysicsOverflow!

... see more

Tools for paper authors

Submit paper
Claim Paper Authorship

Tools for SE users

Search User
Reclaim SE Account
Request Account Merger
Nativise imported posts
Claim post (deleted users)
Import SE post

Users whose questions have been imported from Physics Stack Exchange, Theoretical Physics Stack Exchange, or any other Stack Exchange site are kindly requested to reclaim their account and not to register as a new user.

Public \(\beta\) tools

Report a bug with a feature
Request a new functionality
404 page design
Send feedback

Attributions

(propose a free ad)

Site Statistics

205 submissions , 163 unreviewed
5,064 questions , 2,215 unanswered
5,347 answers , 22,734 comments
1,470 users with positive rep
818 active unimported users
More ...

  Is it ok to upload joke papers to arXiv?

+ 21 like - 0 dislike
6129 views

I have recently stumbled upon this paper on arXiv: Stopping GAN Violence: Generative Unadversarial Networks (mirror), which is a parody/joke paper.

Is it ok to upload joke papers to arXiv?

This post imported from StackExchange Academia at 2020-01-20 16:19 (UTC), posted by SE-user Franck Dernoncourt
asked Mar 11, 2017 in Chat by Franck Dernoncourt (0 points) [ no revision ]
Most voted comments show all comments
@Gallifreyan What do you mean?

This post imported from StackExchange Academia at 2020-01-20 16:19 (UTC), posted by SE-user Franck Dernoncourt
That was a pun :P

This post imported from StackExchange Academia at 2020-01-20 16:19 (UTC), posted by SE-user Gallifreyan
I am surprised (not unpleasantly...) to see such a long list of joke arxiv papers in the field of astrophysics. There are no joke arxiv papers in mathematics. Please correct me if I'm wrong....Pretty please?

This post imported from StackExchange Academia at 2020-01-20 16:19 (UTC), posted by SE-user Pete L. Clark
@PeteL.Clark That is interesting because in mathematics "the genius of Proust is that which he produced" holds most acutely. You cannot B.S a proof to someone actually trying to read it.

This post imported from StackExchange Academia at 2020-01-20 16:19 (UTC), posted by SE-user Jacob Murray Wakem

I imported this as some parts of the answers are physics relevant or related ...

Most recent comments show all comments
Only if you plan to publish it after in the Journal of Alternative Facts.

This post imported from StackExchange Academia at 2020-01-20 16:19 (UTC), posted by SE-user VonBeche
To those in the know, "Under review as a conference paper at SIGBOVIK 2017" is also a strong indicator, SIGBOVIK being the Association for Computational Heresy's annual conference held on or around April 1 in in Pittsburgh.

This post imported from StackExchange Academia at 2020-01-20 16:19 (UTC), posted by SE-user Dougal

4 Answers

+ 28 like - 0 dislike

There is a long tradition of posting joke papers to arXiv on or around April Fool's Day, especially in astro-ph - see the list below. The fact that all these papers were approved for arXiv offers some evidence (though not proof) that joke papers are okay.

It's probably best to limit joke papers to around April 1, though, when people know to be on the lookout for this stuff - or at least provide some indicator which is very clear to experts in the field that the paper is a joke, such as listing it as being submitted to SIGBOVIK or the Annals of Improbable Research.

A history of arXiv joke papers

(mirrored on my website)

This post imported from StackExchange Academia at 2020-01-20 16:19 (UTC), posted by SE-user David Z
answered Mar 12, 2017 by David Z (660 points) [ no revision ]
Most voted comments show all comments
-1, because I was planning on using my time productively before seeing this. (+1!)

This post imported from StackExchange Academia at 2020-01-20 16:20 (UTC), posted by SE-user Nat
So how do non-experts know when they're reading a joke article? That sounds unprofessional and childish to me.

This post imported from StackExchange Academia at 2020-01-20 16:20 (UTC), posted by SE-user Cape Code
@CapeCode Articles on arXiv are targeted at experts. Other people generally won't understand what they're reading whether it's a joke or not.

This post imported from StackExchange Academia at 2020-01-20 16:20 (UTC), posted by SE-user David Z
I can't tell if they are joke or not.

This post imported from StackExchange Academia at 2020-01-20 16:20 (UTC), posted by SE-user HelloWorld
The best joke paper of all times is Gates, V., et al. "Stuperspace." Physica D: Nonlinear Phenomena 15.1-2 (1985): 289-293. The published version is available here: sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0167278985901733 and a free e-copy from here: languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/myl/Stuperspace.pdf. It predates arXiv.

This post imported from StackExchange Academia at 2020-01-20 16:20 (UTC), posted by SE-user ZeroTheHero
Most recent comments show all comments
Goodness, that is a list. You seem to have missed Orthographic Correlations in Astrophysics, though, so I wonder what else is out there.

This post imported from StackExchange Academia at 2020-01-20 16:20 (UTC), posted by SE-user E.P.
Another one for the list: Non-standard morphological relic patterns in the cosmic microwave background, from which Fig. 1 is particularly notable, together with its mention in the text just above it.

This post imported from StackExchange Academia at 2020-01-20 16:20 (UTC), posted by SE-user E.P.
+ 11 like - 0 dislike

The arXiv (pronounced "archive")is a repository of electronic preprints, known as e-prints, of scientific papers in the fields of mathematics, physics, astronomy, computer science, quantitative biology, statistics, and quantitative finance, which can be accessed online.

So, please do not upload joke papers. These papers are not helping the community, and they are not helping the authors of such papers.

Having said that, if the paper has any scientific value, even if it is a funny paper, then it is more than welcome. TCS has a conference called FUN with algorithms the purpose of which is to publish amusing papers with certain algorithmic flavor.

This post imported from StackExchange Academia at 2020-01-20 16:19 (UTC), posted by SE-user PsySp
answered Mar 11, 2017 by PsySp (0 points) [ no revision ]
Most voted comments show all comments
@PsySp: It wasn't intended as a personal comment, but if it came across that way then I apologise. That said, I do think there's a need to distinguish between entertaining papers written by researchers in a field for the amusement of other researchers in the field (which to my mind are, and should be, welcome on arXiv, if not to excess), and spam papers that have nothing to do with the field in question, or contain junk text. In this case, the authors are serious guys writing under their own names, who've put effort into making the paper entertaining to their community.

This post imported from StackExchange Academia at 2020-01-20 16:19 (UTC), posted by SE-user Stuart Golodetz
It's actually not so easy to do well, and it's somewhat risky if (as in the case of one of the guys) you're well-known in the field - in this case, I think they've judged it carefully and got the balance right.

This post imported from StackExchange Academia at 2020-01-20 16:19 (UTC), posted by SE-user Stuart Golodetz
@StuartGolodetz My opinion is that a joke paper, published under Machine Learning tag, is borderline qualified for spam. There are many other places where such a paper would be more appreciated and could potentially invoke less inconveniences. Because, sometimes, it's hard to judge if it's a clear joke or not.

This post imported from StackExchange Academia at 2020-01-20 16:19 (UTC), posted by SE-user PsySp
@PsySp: I think it's subjective - let's move on.

This post imported from StackExchange Academia at 2020-01-20 16:19 (UTC), posted by SE-user Stuart Golodetz
@StuartGolodetz If you are well-known but take your reputation lightly then it is not very risky. Well-known people are HARDER to get sacked, not easier!

This post imported from StackExchange Academia at 2020-01-20 16:19 (UTC), posted by SE-user Jacob Murray Wakem
Most recent comments show all comments
@JeffE please post your own answer?

This post imported from StackExchange Academia at 2020-01-20 16:19 (UTC), posted by SE-user smci
@JeffE A good recipe to receove something like my last "Our volunteer moderators determined that your article does not contain sufficient original or substantive research to merit inclusion within arXiv. Resubmission of removed papers may result in the loss of your submission privileges."

This post imported from StackExchange Academia at 2020-01-20 16:19 (UTC), posted by SE-user Vladimir F
+ 10 like - 0 dislike

Uploading joke papers to arXiv does not violate arXiv policy, according to this email sent by the arXiv moderation:

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: arXiv Moderation
Date: Mon, Mar 13, 2017 at 4:38 PM
Subject: [moderation #189697] Removing a joke paper
To: spamme@gmail.com

Dear Spa,

We will not remove this paper as it does not violate any of our policies.

-- [retracted name]
arXiv moderation

On Sat Mar 11 18:27:47 2017, spamme@gmail.com wrote:

Dear arXiv-moderation,

This paper is a joke paper: https://arxiv.org/abs/1703.02528 (it was submitted to an April 1st joke conference: http://sigbovik.org/2017).

Could you please remove it from arXiv?

Best,
Spa Mme

This seems to be in contradiction with https://arxiv.org/help/moderation (mirror):

arXiv is distinct from the web as a whole, because arXiv contains exclusively scientific research content. Although arXiv is open to submissions from the scientific communities, our team has worked behind the scenes for a long time to ensure the quality of our content.

arXiv moderators will suggest the removal of a submission that violates arXiv policies in some way. Potential reasons for removal are: Inappropriate format. arXiv accepts only submissions in the form of an article that would be refereeable by a conventional publication venue. This excludes […] papers that contain inflammatory or fictitious content, papers that use highly dramatic and mis-representative titles/abstracts/introductions.

This post imported from StackExchange Academia at 2020-01-20 16:20 (UTC), posted by SE-user Franck Dernoncourt
answered Mar 13, 2017 by Franck Dernoncourt (0 points) [ no revision ]
That might be slightly surprising. In ArXiv moderation system page we read: "arXiv is distinct from the web as a whole, because arXiv contains exclusively scientific research content." and "arXiv is an openly accessible, moderated repository for scholarly papers in specific scientific disciplines. Material submitted to arXiv is expected to be of interest, relevance, and value to those disciplines. arXiv reserves the right to reject or reclassify any submission." I wonder why ArXiv moderators classify clear joke papers as scholarly papers with scientific content.

This post imported from StackExchange Academia at 2020-01-20 16:20 (UTC), posted by SE-user PsySp
@PsySp Yes I was surprised too (and disappointed). I wonder what it takes to be an arXiv-approved joke.

This post imported from StackExchange Academia at 2020-01-20 16:20 (UTC), posted by SE-user Franck Dernoncourt
Maybe these excerpts from the Moderation page of ArXiv should be added to your answer because it seem they directly contradict the answer you received from the moderator! arxiv.org/help/moderation (It is even in bold!)

This post imported from StackExchange Academia at 2020-01-20 16:20 (UTC), posted by SE-user PsySp
@PsySp Sounds good, added. Apparently a joke isn't fictitious content, but is scientific research content.

This post imported from StackExchange Academia at 2020-01-20 16:20 (UTC), posted by SE-user Franck Dernoncourt
+ 1 like - 0 dislike

Also, realize that people have done this to real journals. Consider the Sokol hoax. Or the famous math paper about big game hunting mocking.

I would avoid doing it too much. And if it gets done too much it will damage the resource. That said, a little bit is kind of amusing. Especially if skillfully done. But some pepper is good...too much is bad.

This post imported from StackExchange Academia at 2020-01-20 16:20 (UTC), posted by SE-user guest
answered Apr 2, 2018 by guest_utf8 (0 points) [ no revision ]

Your answer

Please use answers only to (at least partly) answer questions. To comment, discuss, or ask for clarification, leave a comment instead.
To mask links under text, please type your text, highlight it, and click the "link" button. You can then enter your link URL.
Please consult the FAQ for as to how to format your post.
This is the answer box; if you want to write a comment instead, please use the 'add comment' button.
Live preview (may slow down editor)   Preview
Your name to display (optional):
Privacy: Your email address will only be used for sending these notifications.
Anti-spam verification:
If you are a human please identify the position of the character covered by the symbol $\varnothing$ in the following word:
p$\hbar$ysicsOverf$\varnothing$ow
Then drag the red bullet below over the corresponding character of our banner. When you drop it there, the bullet changes to green (on slow internet connections after a few seconds).
Please complete the anti-spam verification




user contributions licensed under cc by-sa 3.0 with attribution required

Your rights
...