In the following licence to publish:

6.b) preprints (before referee) can be posted to electronic preprint servers

6.c) postprints (after referee) can be posted to subject repositories

Now I am wondering whether arxiv is an electronic preprint server (wiki says it is) a subject repository for math (wiki says it is) or neither or both.

As I could not find any useful distinction between these two terms online, it feels appropriate to ask the question here.

I have one article accepted in the magazine and the editorial team has send me the proof-read version. I have a little issue that I need to change the name of the article as the requirement of my thesis. The article was accepted with the name “Future trends in Personal indoor communication”. I want to change it to “Future trends in indoor communication”. I will really appreciate if the seniors can comment on my following response.

Dear Mr. Editor,

Thank you for accepting the article titled, “Future
trends in Personal Indoor Communication” for publication in IEEE
Potentials. As part of the proof-read stage, I would request a minor
change in the title. Since my modified PhD thesis title includes
“Indoor Communication”, instead of “Personal Indoor Communication”, I
will really appreciate if the editor allows me to reflect this change
in the mentioned article. This is important to maintain the coherency
between my published work and the PhD thesis.

The modification in the
title will subsequently require minor (editorial) changes in the text
as well. For example, Personal Indoor Communication (or PIC) should be
replaced by Indoor Communication (or IC) in the text. Likewise, Fig. 2
should be modified to reflect this change. For this purpose, I have
attached the new figure as the supplementary material.

Please do let me know if this is possible. I apologize for the
inconvenience it may cause to the publishing team.

Shan Jaffry

On behalf of the Authors

Isn’t a Half Title redundant, when the Title page already states the full half Title? See Wikipedia:

enter image description here

I know why books must have blank pages, but why not leave this page blank?

I instance David Benatar’s Better Never to Have Been, as it’s the only OUP book that I possess physically. The front cover contains the full title ‘Better Never to Have Been: The Harm Of Coming Into Existence’. Then the Half title page states only ‘BETTER NEVER TO HAVE BEEN’.

After having presented a paper of mine at a conference last summer, I received an email from someone claiming to be part of an editorial team of a journal, to whom my paper was recommended. I sent my work to them, and received an unconditional acceptance after four weeks. But there have been some things that made me doubtful on whether it is actually a good idea to go on and publish there.

I received no comments from reviewers. The journal claims on the website that it is “peer-reviewed” (says nothing on the blindness). When I inquired about comments, the assistant to the editor told me that the editor’s comments could be forwarded to me, but that that would take some time. I am currently waiting for this (for about three weeks).

The contact I have with them, exclusively with the editor’s assistant, has been interesting. I receive emails at times when people in the US (it is an American journal) are unlikely to work. The person has an Indian-sounding name, and the hours of activity are more likely to be Indian working hours than American.

I could not find anything on the assistant to the editor online. She has referred to me multiple times as “Dr.”, even though I am not yet, never used that prefix, and wrote to her after the first time that that is the wrong title. In general, the mails are unresponsive, and only answer one question out of three I asked them, etc.

On the journal website, they cite their h-index for the year 2010, and compare it to those of other journals in 2010. The journal does not appear in the ranking at In turn, I do not know how reputable that website is, but it looks quite complete.

I can not find a list of articles that appeared in this journal on their website. I would like such a list to compare my article to others, and to see who the other authors are, how often their articles were subsequently cited, etc. As the journal’s name is consisting of quite generic words, it is difficult to find articles from it on Google scholar – or they are not even indexed on Google scholar, although they claim to be on their website.

In case of acceptance, I have to pay 320$ to publish, this includes the subscription to the journal for one year.

I am now wondering whether, given all of the above, it is a good journal to publish in, or whether there even is such a thing as a scam in this area of academia that I need to be aware of. Other journals also require a publication fee or even a submission fee, but in their cases, it is more clear to the authors what they gain in return. If it is not a financial scam, could it be a sort of academic scam – an attempt to steal results? But what good are stolen results with no data?

Should I mention the publisher and the journal name in this question?

International Conference on Web Services (ICWS) is one of the top conferences for web service researchers. But this year (2018), I find there are two ICWS websites:

  1. (this one is the old website for ICWS 2017, 2016..)
  2. (this one is sponsored by IEEE)

Which one is genuine? And as I’m a Chinese researcher, another thing I care about is that which one is recognized as the B-level conference by CCF (China Computer Federation)?

I understand that academics are not paid a single dime on their publications. In my field (computer science), IEEE, ACM, Springer, Elsevier are some known journals/publications and none of them pay authors any royalties but they charge the readers a substantial amount of money per paper.

I’m a new PhD student so please bear with me if there is something obvious that I am missing here. I was told by my advisor that to graduate I need to publish in IEEE or ACM. He did not suggest, and I do not know of any reputed journal in my field, that either pays royalties to authors or allows free access to readers. I am forced to publish my papers at IEEE or ACM if I want to graduate and find a job afterwards.

My questions:

  • Why are PhD students, professors, and others who publish their life’s
    works in professional research publications not paid royalties on
    their hard work poured into these papers?

  • If academics choose not to make money (e.g. they are not greedy and
    want to promote free education for all) shouldn’t these publications
    not charge readers an absurd $30 for 6-7 page paper? Shouldn’t the
    publications charge a nominal fee that covers paying their employees
    and distributions cost, but nothing more. Right now, it’s a trillion
    dollar profit industry
    . Why are the publications pocketing all of
    the profits on research done by scientists? And why is the research
    community OK with this?

  • If this really is an issue (Aaron Swartz — famous hacktivist — lost
    his life fighting against this injustice
    ), what can be done against
    this issue by the research community and academics? For example, if
    researchers at top institutions (in my field) such as MIT, Berkeley etc.
    boycotted publications that do not pay researchers AND charge the
    readers (thus pocketing all profits), can this issue be rectified?
    Can PhD students and professors start submitting to other journals
    that either pay royalties or be free to readers?

Please help a new PhD student from an underdeveloped country understand this issue. In my country, a lot of the people never go to universities or colleges (thus have no discounted university access to these papers) but are very bright and could use them.


Although, I think I was clear in the original text above, from one answer here it seems I am coming off as “naive” asking journals to make papers free access AND pay royalties — a clearly unsustainable business model. No. I am asking for either this OR that. Either pay fair royalties to authors OR make their papers free access (maybe charge readers a nominal fee to cover publishing and distribution costs). I just do not understand why it is justified for publishers to pocket billions of dollars of profit.


Since I said in my original post above that I am a PhD student and there might be a connection I am missing due to my inexperience, I am now adding other sources (e.g. posts by senior professors) that are relevant to this discussion:

  • Some of my students asked me yesterday who profits from the egregious
    pricing structure of academic journals. The only answer I could give
    them was: publishers like Taylor & Francis, Elsevier, Wiley, Springer,
    et al.

    As noted by The Economist, Elsevier made $1.1 billion in profit in
    2010 for a profit margin of 36%; Taylor & Francis’s profit margin was
    25%. In 2011, Elsevier and its senior executives made 31 contributions
    to members of the U.S. House of Representatives, of which 12 went to
    NY Congresswoman Carolyn Maloney, who sponsored something called the
    Research Works Act (RWA), a bill that would it illegal for the
    government to make taxpayer-funded research openly accessible to the

  • Brian Nosek, a professor at the University of Virginia and director of the Center for Open Science, says, “Academic publishing is the
    perfect business model to make a lot of money. You have the producer
    and consumer as the same person: the researcher. And the researcher
    has no idea how much anything costs.” Nosek finds this whole system
    is designed to maximize the amount of profit. “I, as the researcher,
    produce the scholarship and I want it to have the biggest impact
    possible and so what I care about is the prestige of the journal and
    how many people read it. Once it is finally accepted, since it is so
    hard to get acceptances, I am so delighted that I will sign
    anything — send me a form and I will sign it. I have no idea I have
    signed over my copyright or what implications that has — nor do I
    care, because it has no impact on me. The reward is the publication.”


I would like to once again stress that I realize that publishers need to cover costs and even make a bit of profit. I am not against that. I understand that businesses exist to make profit. But if certain publishing houses are making excess profit of billions while paying nothing back to the authors, how is that fair? There is no problem with the journal covering their costs. My question is: are they just covering their costs or are they making a substantial/hefty profit which is leading to an elite few at the top (maybe shareholders of publishing house) getting very rich? It seems they are making billions of dollars in profit — after covering all distribution, publication and other costs.

Please note that I am merely looking to understand the issue better and have no preconceived notions such as “publishers are evil”.