NATIONAL NUCLEAR DATA CENTER
Bldg. 197DBrookhaven National Laboratory
P. O. Box 5000
Upton, NY 11973-5000, U.S.A.
Telephone: (516)344-5096
FAX: (516)344-2806

Memo CP-C/380
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:

September 21, 2006
Distribution
D. Rochman, P. Oblozinsky
Proposal to change the geographic compilation responsibility to fulljournal coverage

Proposal
We propose to replace the current geographic compilation responsibility of refereed
journals and nuclear data conference proceedings by their full coverage as follows,
starting on January 2007, for neutron, charged particle and photon –induced reactions:••••

NNDC – all refereed journals published in US (Physical Review C, Nuclear
Science and Engineering, Physical Review Letters, etc) irrespective of thegeographic origin of the paper.
NEA DB - all refereed journals published in EU (Nuclear Physics A, Nuclear
Instruments & Methods, etc.)
IPPE Obninsk – all refereed journals published in Russia (Yadernaya Fizika, etc.)
NDS – all remaining refereed journals

Justification
The process of searching in the literature for relevant publications for the CSISRS
database requires lot of efforts and time, mainly because of the geographic
distribution of journal coverage. The proposed change, from the geographic journal
coverage to editor-related journal coverage, would require less searching time andwill speed up the compilation process.
Up to now, a compiler needs to screen all the nuclear physics literature in order to findrelevant publication that she/he is allowed to compile following the “geographicdistribution” rule. (1) It requires lot of searching time to go through about 20 mainjournals. The potential danger is that a compiler will focus on some major journals(like Physical Review, Nuclear Physics) and will neglect to carefully study othersource of publications where relevant articles occasionally occur. (2) Anotherdrawback is the repetition of work performed between centers. For instance, allcompilers need to go through the APS journals to find articles that should be compiled.
This implies that a compiler in the USA is looking at Elsevier journals, a compiler atthe IAEA is also looking at the same journals and a third compiler working for theNEA Data Bank is checking for the third time the same journals. (3) A hypotheticaladvantage of this process (that a compiler will contact another center to inform itabout potential article of interest) is actually not working because of additionalamount of work that it requires.
(4) A common argument in favor of the “geographic distribution” is that it is easier tocompile a publication from an experimental work performed in the vicinity of the data
center. This might be true at a time when communications were not as fast as today,
when laboratories did not exchange information so that an experimental procedure
was used at a single place, or when communications between countries wereminimized for political reasons. None of these reasons do apply today. Because of hewide e-mail access, data can be sent from China to Europe in a minute; with extensive
laboratory collaborations, common experimental methods are universally used; all
published information is widely shared between countries.
Thus, we propose “publisher distribution” rule instead of the “geographicdistribution” rule for article publication and conference proceedings. As an example,
the NNDC would be responsible for APS journals and Canadian journals. The
advantages will be:- Faster literature search for the compilers- No search repetition between centers- No dependence on other centers to find relevant publications- Possible contact between compilation centers and publishers in order toperform less manual intervention in the compilation process.
This last possibility will bring another dimension to the compilation process. With thecurrent technology, it is possible to have a more automatic compilation process wherea publisher could provide a compilation center with already formatted information
directly from the published paper. By the “geographical distribution”, the applicationof this idea becomes more complicated because it would involve a broader agreement
between institutions, compilation centers and publishers.
In summary, we propose a modification of the geographic journal coverage topublisher journal coverage to speed up the compilation process, avoid redundant workand use modern technology to automatize compilation procedures.

Distribution:
vml@bnl.gov
drochman@bnl.gov
manokhin@ippe.obninsk.ru
maev@ippe.obninsk.ru
may@obninsk.ru
Mmarina@ippe.obninsk.rug
blokhin@ippe.obninsk.ru
feliks@polyn.kiae.su
chukreev@polyn.kiae.su
S.Dunaeva@iaea.org
taova@expd.vniief.ru
varlamov@depni.sinp.msu.ru
kato@nucl.sci.hokudai.ac.jp
ohnishi@nucl.sci.hokudai.ac.jp

gezg@iris.ciae.ac.cn
hongwei@iris.ciae.ac.cn
tarkanyi@atomki.hu
stakacs@atomki.hu
vlasov@kinr.kiev.ua
ogritzay@kinr.kiev.ua
ohtsuka@nucl.sci.hokudai.ac.jp
m.wirtz@iaea.org
m.lammer@iaea.org
v.pronyaev@iaea.org
v.zerkin@iaea.org
henriksson@nea.fr
exfor@nea.fr
schwerer@iaea.or.at