The problem I have with closed (access) papers - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / general

author: b_force
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 14, 2018, 02:27:36 pm
content: Well, technically this isn't about hardware, but since this is the only forum group that's about open source I think this is the right spot.As a R&D engineer I am often very interested what is going on around the world with new technology.As an engineer I also strongly believe in how science works; people postulate an theory, do research to test their theories and share it so everyone else can read if their findings are actually not some kind of scam.Other people can repeat the experiment to confirm the findings of the paper in question.Unfortunately, what happens quiet often is that people first need to pay a pretty hefty commission to join some kind of society in the first place.Second is that a lot of times papers are easily 5-20 bucks each!Of course research isn't free and costs are being made.But isn't this going right against the whole idea of science; sharing your findings with the world so the rest of the world can criticize it?I mean asking pretty pennies for just a paper lowers the credibility pretty significant in my opinion.Also it makes it a lot less accessible for the bigger audience (officially each individual has to buy his own copy).Which is particularly annoying with certain myths that are still floating around today.I do see "open access" papers popping up more often, but still a significant amount people need to pay for it.

author: Mechatrommer
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 14, 2018, 02:56:35 pm
content: Quote from: b_force on July 14, 2018, 02:27:36 pmieee community doesnt seem too bad, student membership is about $10-20..Quote from: b_force on July 14, 2018, 02:27:36 pmthose people got to eat what do you expect? put it to yourself, are you willing to do charity work while at the same time eating grass?Quote from: b_force on July 14, 2018, 02:27:36 pmyou said it yourself, so they have to compensate, by charging their years of knowledge and R&D. you should be blessed if they even sell it.Quote from: b_force on July 14, 2018, 02:27:36 pmthey share it with the people they know, not some random people that could possibly a maniac or KGB, "criticize" is an ideal term, in reality it can be misused, a free shortcut to the next development etc etc.Quote from: b_force on July 14, 2018, 02:27:36 pmusually free access is to the well known knowledge, proven since some decades back. paid papers usually enhancement or specialization of that general knowledge thats been done recently by some usually small group of research team or individuals. it costed money to do the research why do you expect free meal from them? for sensitive cutting edge military grade technologies, just dream on acquiring that type of knowledge even if you have 7 digit money in your pocket.

author: b_force
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 14, 2018, 03:08:30 pm
content: Who cares about student memberships?We are engineers, not students anymore.Like I said, I get that people need to eat, that's not the point.But my whole point is that it drives right against to whole thinking how science works.I even believe that in people actually reach a smaller audience because of the costs.In the end you're doing research to get your word out, not to get rich.Than you're doing the wrong job.Personally, I see research and writing papers as an ancillary.So with the job I pay my bills, with papers I reach the audience.

author: Mechatrommer
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 14, 2018, 04:50:55 pm
content: Quote from: b_force on July 14, 2018, 03:08:30 pmif you cant afford professional anual fee of $77 then its too sad, you can either subscribe as student as i suggested, or find another employer who pays decently.Quote from: b_force on July 14, 2018, 03:08:30 pmyou may start to set the example. i believe you are not the first. but you cant force other to follow the course because they may have different problem from yours.i got your point on open (free) informations for sharing criticizing whatever. you are actually proposing the idealistic of "open source" community. you may learn from that, most others still preferred paid version. mainly due to heavily degraded quality of "open source" product, ask again why? the large chunks who buy "open source" are mostly non-professional non profitable student type people.

author: rhb
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 14, 2018, 05:01:17 pm
content: IEEE commonly charges *members* $25 per paper!I dropped my membership because it didn't really offer any benefits. To solve the paper access problem I go to a university about 75 miles from home and spend a few hours with a USB drive downloading papers. Far from ideal, but at least I can afford it.I spent my career in reflection seismology. Fortunately, SEG does not have such insane paper charges, though SPE does. So to get those I went though the company library until it ceased to exist. But for a normal piece of work I would typically collect 20-40 papers. In some cases *many* more.Professional societies which charge members for access to the literature are only giving lip service to promoting the field they purport to serve. Mostly they are feathering someone's nest.A lot of academics publish first as a departmental report and then submit a paper. That way the IEEE and Elsevier goon squads can't touch them.

author: Mechatrommer
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 14, 2018, 05:47:17 pm
content: Quote from: rhb on July 14, 2018, 05:01:17 pmit depends on how you value them. i think not all the fee will go to the author (some paper involves several authors), only small portion of it, maybe some to university supporting them and the rest go to ieee etc. they are talking about using the money for charity or development or awareness of some sort. i dont know maybe just a lip service, or just to get someone rich. but i've seen universities and schools too doing outdoor activities to expose or develop students more. all these require money, more money more activities. and being in education sector, government budget can be tight we'll need all the money we can get to do such activities, even we have to find donors and beg money from some people, it will be ideal if someone in the sector is willing to pull his pocket money out for that, are you? i havent seen a rich man working in education sector except from his own salary and in really high position. the one with the side income will not get that rich either.Quote from: rhb on July 14, 2018, 05:01:17 pmthe nearest to me is 500km. and i remember in other university, we need to apply for member card in order to go into the library where all the papers are in.Quote from: rhb on July 14, 2018, 05:01:17 pmthat equal to someone doing a research or master thesis. if you are doing it every day i dont know how many thesis (master) you already have.

author: kony
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: July 14, 2018, 07:38:10 pm
content: Noone here heard of Scihub yet?

author: Doctorandus_P
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 14, 2018, 08:43:45 pm
content: And the sadest part is that the people who write the papers often almost get nothing, or a very small part of the money you pay for those papers.

author: GeorgeOfTheJungle
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 14, 2018, 09:12:37 pm
content: The saddest part is that those papers in many cases come from public money funded research projects, from public universities. And even saddest yet when said papers end up as patents owned by the same teachers/students/teams whom we paid to in the first place to do the research for us.Most public universities are public money suckers, corrupt, corporativist and endogamic, a very well paid dirty bussiness, nowadays. Fortunately internet might end with that. It's quite well pictured in "The Big Bang Theory", BTW.

author: ferdieCX
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: July 14, 2018, 09:19:17 pm
content: I am already IEEE member and I also pay extra for having access to the Proceedings of the IEEE.Sadly, the IEEE has too many different journals and magazines, and very oft what I need was published in some obscure one.

author: rhb
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 14, 2018, 10:50:52 pm
content: Anyone who only read 30-40 papers for an MS did a really crappy job and had a very poor supervisor. Bear in mind that a large fraction of the papers don't have any significant content. For my MS, a major point was a single sentence in an obscure paper that I should never have found without the help of a librarian who was a computer search expert in the late 70's.I frequently was asked to implement software for something someone heard about. Or fix what someone else had done. There are often many ways of doing such things. In the case of processing directional surveys of wells there are about a dozen. Only one is any good, but often people want to run old pencil and graph paper methods to compare to old data. The folder I have for that is about 3" thick. I had to write software for processing directional surveys at least 4 times at different companies. It was a huge headache collecting all those papers. The one good method has two different names.Lots of my work involved the continuum mechanics of porous media. The gist of that is how much does the pore fluid affect the stiffness of the rock. That in turn leads to the question of what is the compressibility of an oil of a specific composition at a certain temperature and pressure. The papers from that work fill a file drawer and the books fill about 6 ft of shelves. And I didn't get all that heavily involved with it relative to some people I know.I'm a research scientist, not an engineer. Very different world. I recently got interested in compressive sensing and more generally sparse L1 pursuits. That exercise involved reading an 800 page book once and a 600 page book twice, after which I started reading the original papers. Those now occupy 4 folders totaling about 5" printed double sided. If you want to learn something about which you are ignorant, that's often the price of admission.The reason I pull so many papers is because I have so often found that the references in a paper were incorrect. I start with a few recent papers, then I get the major papers they cite and then the major papers they cite. My mother taught me to read before age 5, so by 3rd grade I could read at high school level. An English lit BA got me to the point I could read 600-800 words per minute. Eye problems have slowed me down a bit, but I can still rip along at 300 or so. Naturally, mathematics is hours per page and sometimes days.

author: b_force
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 15, 2018, 02:41:13 am
content: Quote from: GeorgeOfTheJungle on July 14, 2018, 09:12:37 pmThis is especially true in the medical world.A friend of mine is medical researcher and she told me that some professors poop out more than 10 papers a month.Not these 5-10 page leaflets but at least 20 pages minimum.You can't even read that in one month, let alone 10 of these things.For the record, i am a absolutely not new to these.Been going on for many years, but just by coincidence I just ran into another annoying issue again.Sometimes really gets me.And than be wonder why there is so much ignorance in the world.

author: xaxaxa
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: July 15, 2018, 09:51:45 am
content: Quote from: Mechatrommer on July 14, 2018, 02:56:35 pmAll of that money goes to the journal, none to the original author.I have never in my life paid a cent to journals (except maybe indirectly through my tuition) and never will.I use sci-hub to view papers ever since my university credentials expired and always download a copy; I urge anyone reading this to do the same, and if sci-hub goes down we can all post our papers cache so that they can be found by the public.

author: Mechatrommer
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 15, 2018, 01:15:35 pm
content: Quote from: xaxaxa on July 15, 2018, 09:51:45 ami quickly checked sci-hub last night it doesnt have the paper that i bought last time, and its suggested sci-napse? search engine lead me to the paid ieee version which i bought last time. but yes, before anything, i will google for free copy, for advanced specialized study (or if i think i need more) that i cannot get freely, i have to pay, and personally i feel blessed they even sell it. i got my reference at $15 per paper which i think is not much. i only bought 2 or 3 paper though from ieee, so no serious penalty on money consumption. i think they will be a good supplement to free copy of "general theory" that i already had, they are math intensive though more than i can comprehend, so catching up is something to do beforehand. i only can get an idea on how they do the optimization, generally speaking. otoh, last time i found a website charging for repair and manual pdf stuffs, they charge like $5 for 40 copies, i think if they charge 10X of that i still be willing to pay, because some of the materials are non existence in free domain. but i cant find the website anymore its sad.Quote from: xaxaxa on July 15, 2018, 09:51:45 ami suspect if that is the case, no author will be wiling to publish to them, and if what they claimed about public awareness sponsorship is just lip service. there will be private website everywhere selling their own paper. or better just publish it for free in sci-hub or something, no lose no gain.

author: b_force
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 15, 2018, 02:26:44 pm
content: Mmm, that method seems to work with the IEEE, unfortunately not with AES.org

author: Kleinstein
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 15, 2018, 03:06:15 pm
content: Quote from: b_force on July 15, 2018, 02:41:13 amPutting out so many papers is kind of required in the US to get on with the carrier. The result is that those 10 papers are essentially the same - maybe 10 % changed with essentially no new contend. It is a stupid system made to be fooled.

author: rhb
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 15, 2018, 05:24:24 pm
content: Quote from: Mechatrommer on July 15, 2018, 01:15:35 pmYou clearly don't know *anything* about the subject. The "publish or perish" imperative is such that many journals require the author to pay a "per page charge" which is often several hundred dollars for text and substantially more for color figures. So it's not that they don't get paid for publishing. They have to pay to get published.Where you get published is important to getting tenure. Hence the racketeering by the journal publishers.The whole thing has become a scandalous mess, but is unlikely to improve soon.Science ran an editorial recently in which they noted that only about 5% of PhDs are able to secure an academic post. The rest are condemned to wander from school to school and grant to grant with no sense of security. All of this is a deliberate policy encouraged by governments, of which the US is probably the worst offender. The hope is that out of a thousand monkey, one might prove to be an Einstein.

author: Mechatrommer
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 15, 2018, 06:36:17 pm
content: Quote from: rhb on July 15, 2018, 05:24:24 pmi dont know what you are talking about. the paid (and free) papers i got have no colors and written by several people with years of working experience jumping from aerospace, some engineering dept and then secured position in universities for years. if you have some job saturation problem, then it deserves another topic in general section.

author: rhb
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 15, 2018, 08:38:26 pm
content: Read this:http://cofactorscience.com/blog/author-chargesIt is just about traditional page charges. Open access fees are a new twist. The pressure for open access has in large part been generated by the very aggressive stance that Elsevier, IEEE and others have taken towards copyright infringement.At one point I was spending $1500/yr on journal subscriptions because my client company had closed their library without making any provision for literature access. But for the most part that only got me access to current literature. On a trip to Stanford for a consortium meeting I spent many hours in the library at a copying machine copying papers I could affordably obtain in no other way.I *thought* this thread was about the cost of literature access. I was merely pointing out *why* the journal publishers have been able to get away with it. You made the claim that authors were getting paid by the journals. I merely tried to make clear that not only do they not get paid, they have to pay. And they will get a cease and desist letter from the publisher's lawyers if the put a copy of their own work up on a personal web page unless they pay the "article publication charge".The 30-40 papers number I quoted was for a typical 4-6 week programming project. That's certainly not an MS thesis.

author: JohnG
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: July 15, 2018, 09:36:31 pm
content: Lots of facts and fancy mixed up here.Yes, it sucks that individual IEEE papers cost so much. However, at least they make some attempt at peer review (and at least some of us do a pretty thorough job). And, for those who have not done it, there is a hell of a lot of work that goes into publishing this stuff for what amounts to a really limited audience.And, they allow authors to make their work available. There are restrictions, but they are not onerous. Seehttps://www.ieee.org/publications/rights/rights-policies.html. No, it's not perfect, but essentially authors and their employers can make the papers available if they so choose. It's much better that Elsevier or the like.That being said, it's probably a dying model.As for academia, the crazy patent stuff started in the US when states cut funding for state schools, at least. In return, the schools got ability to monetize IP, and in some states, raise tuition.In the name of KNOWLEDGE, I am providing my opinions for FREEJohn

author: b_force
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 15, 2018, 11:26:31 pm
content: Quote from: rhb on July 15, 2018, 08:38:26 pmIf anything, I started the thread to discuss about the fact that it happens.In my opinion it's morally wrong and basically right against what science stands for.Don't care if it costs money or not.Running a police force also costs money.I just gave one example about how getting to pay your bills with other methods, there are many more.Science of any kind has to be transparent and objective.Making it only accessible for bearded men with big wallets is pretty far from that.

author: IanB
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 15, 2018, 11:28:58 pm
content: Quote from: Mechatrommer on July 15, 2018, 01:15:35 pmYou don't need to suspect. It really is the case. Scientific journals do not pay the authors for the papers they publish, nor do they pay the reviewers for their work when reviewing the papers prior to publication. The reason this situation persists is that papers are only recognized when they appear in journals with prestigious titles. You can write a paper and publish it yourself, but it will carry no weight and will not be valued.

author: rhb
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 15, 2018, 11:33:31 pm
content: From the link." Authors shall not post the final, published versions of their articles."Unfortunately, not all authors publish a preprint.The case where it gets really painful is work from 20+ years ago. IEEE has that very thoroughly pay walled at very stiff rates. I wanted to read a bunch of papers on network analyzers (e.g. 6 port). I'm limited to no more than 2 hours of access per visit at the university, but at least I can get the papers. I certainly cannot afford $675 in charges for the 27 papers I got for a hobby interest.As a friend of mine likes to say I'm a 3 sigma outlier. I have a 5000+ volume personal technical library and I actually check the citations of the citations for anything which has even a remote possibility of being important. There is a particular citation in the geophysical literature which is almost invariably wrong. Correct author, wrong paper.I don't mind paying for papers. At $1-5 I would not bat an eyelash. Five thousand technical books don't come cheap. I have a *lot* of books which cost over $100. But I was able to charge a very good rate as a contractor because if a question arose, I would often show up at work the next day with the definitive answer.

author: Mechatrommer
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 15, 2018, 11:47:24 pm
content: Well if that is the case, if i'm the author, the journal can go fuck themselves. I'll setup my own website and publish my own work there, whether paid, donation or free based. Whatever model i want, no obligation to journal whatsoever, or simply put in the sci-hub or any file cloud based whatever hosting with good search hit, if want more audience. And let the journal die slowly. Well but, if the paper only avail in journal then its inevitable from readers standpoint.Why it will have no weight if i put on personal website? Any interested reader will eventually found it, this is internet age. If all authors put in personal website and enforce copyright, community will start to realize journal is not the place anymore and will die quicker than you know.

author: rhb
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 15, 2018, 11:59:39 pm
content: You're not trying to get tenured as a professor.

author: b_force
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 16, 2018, 12:06:18 am
content: Quote from: rhb on July 15, 2018, 11:59:39 pmAs if professors are the only one able to bring out papers?What do you exactly mean with your response?As mentioned, donations will work extremely well here.A bit like patreon.

author: IanB
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 16, 2018, 12:11:22 am
content: Quote from: Mechatrommer on July 15, 2018, 11:47:24 pmIt's about the peer review process. Papers published in journals (are supposed to) go through a rigorous peer review process to separate the wheat from the chaff. A self-published article does not have that same stamp of quality. Furthermore, you will not be able to persuade recognized authorities in the field to review and approve your own work if you are an unknown author.

author: Mechatrommer
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 16, 2018, 12:13:46 am
content: @rhb.. If you are, is it worth it? and we have to live with any regulation they (govn, uni or journal) are imposing, if you want something back in return.. i think this is offtopic but anyway the answer is usually $$$, in your case is in exchange with fame..

author: JohnG
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: July 16, 2018, 12:55:19 am
content: I don't like the prices either, and I think they might get more support if they charged something like $5. I lost my access when I left my big company job.Everyone is free to write whatever they want and put it on the web. That's one of the things that is great about it, but also one of the biggest drawbacks. There is at least a modicum of quality control for IEEE journal papers, they have a good search system, and links to both references and citing papers, which can be very useful when researching a subject (this part is available for free, by the way, and if you still feel cheated, well, there is always sci-hub). Sure, you can find it on the web if you look long and hard enough, and wade through a bunch of crap to find the gems. And, I do this and have found some gems, EEVblog being one of them! But if you do this for a living, it can get very expensive to do much work this way.For what it's worth, IEEE members can get cheaper access (25 papers a month for $44, 6 month minimum)https://www.ieee.org/membership-catalog/productdetail/showProductDetailPage.html?product=ONLMDL. No, it's not free. But it is at least an attempt to provide reasonable pricing.But, like I said earlier, it's probably a dying model.John

author: rhb
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 16, 2018, 01:07:18 am
content: My point is simply this:The current restrictions on access to papers is only possible because there are 20x more PhDs than there are academic positions. So even allowing for half of them to go into industry, getting a tenured academic post is difficult and is entirely dependent upon how many papers and what journals you have published in.So the publishers are putting the screws to untenured faculty. Pay for open access, or we hide your work behind a paywall. Financial analysts estimate Elsevier's profit margin at 37%.I'm "retired" because oil prices are low and I terminated my contract in 2007 to look after my parents. Fortunate timing on my part as I sold my house about 6-8 weeks before the collapse in 2008. There is no work for oil industry research scientists in their 60s. Prices are improving, so maybe there is still hope. But if the work you do is finding oil that costs over $80 to get out of the ground no one wants to do that with oil at $70. I've been through a layoff cycle every 18-24 months my entire career. Fortunately, I had the sense to be *very* frugal despite making serious money.I have a negligible publication record. Most of my career I worked as a contract scientist which made getting permissions almost impossible.Academia is so corrupt now that they won't even answer emails. I Have 30 years of PhD level signal processing experience. I have repeatedly emailed both the professor who teaches a course in DSP and the department secretary to discuss new developments by Donoho and Candes which are, in my opinion, the greatest work since Wiener and Shannon. I've never gotten a response. It will be interesting to see what happens when I telephone.I did not get my PhD. After 4 years at UT Austin, my supervisor terminated my financial support after moving the goal post for 4 years and making me slave to a computer for 3. In fairness to him, I should note that he was going blind at the time. I'd already lost over $100K in income as a grad student. I was not prepared to lose more so I went back to work. I had acquired the skills that the PhD is expected to confer. Starting over at Stanford was not worth the loss of $150K of income. I was not going in to debt, but I was not making money either.

author: Bassman59
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 16, 2018, 01:19:23 am
content: Quote from: b_force on July 16, 2018, 12:06:18 amWhat he is saying is that if you are a post-doc and you want to get a tenured faculty position, you must publish, and by "publish" we mean "published in the specific peer-reviewed journals accepted by tenure committees."The work can be brilliant and original but if it is not published in the "right" journals, it will be ignored by those who hold the purse-strings and the jobs.

author: a59d1
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: July 16, 2018, 01:37:55 am
content: https://twitter.com/hwitteman/status/1015049411276300289To quote:QuoteIf you think the cost to access is going to the researchers, you've obviously never published anything. Researchers are usually paid by universities. Researchers, with rare exception, have topayto have their papers published in these for-profit journals owned by Elsevier et al. Universities purchase subscriptions to this journals so anybody on campus can access them without logging in. Anybody who actually pays $35 to access a paper is an utter chump. Use sci-hub.QuoteThis is so wrong I can't even address it.Quote from: Mechatrommer on July 14, 2018, 04:50:55 pmThis is a really, really stupid statement. Yes, some open source projects are utter shit, usually because the founders don't fully open or document them. But Linux/RHEL is far and away the most reliable and efficient OS in the solar system for general use, and has an extraordinarily fast patching system for all kinds of bugs. Python, C, C++, Rust, GCC, Go, Java - these are all tremendously productive and successful products, and they are all essentially full open source with some minor exceptions. KiCAD is getting plausibly close to overtaking Altium in terms of ease-of-use and productivity. I could name thousands of other OS projects.

author: Mechatrommer
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 16, 2018, 02:02:45 am
content: Is linux the only one holy grail you are hold on to? I've heard this like 1000 times my entire life, yes linux is fine, but just that. Kicad is supported by cern, before that what? you can name any os you like i can even build one if its worth my time. But how many is success? I know only linux, but i believe it has ecosystem supporting it. How many can follow the model? I can name you many sw (that i consider a failure), or/but not used in pro business. Even kicad is far from discussion among pro, only hobbiests.overtaking altium? In term of feature? That is daydream talk.

author: ChunkyPastaSauce
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: July 16, 2018, 02:09:56 am
content: One option, if you are lucky enough to be near a US public university or college, you can usually use the library to get access to most papers.

author: Mechatrommer
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 16, 2018, 02:26:43 am
content: And linux the pc is in existence since i know how to differentiate red and blue. But until today, it doesnt have support from pro community, hw n sw dev, lack of device driver support and pro sw availability. Geez its like what? 20-30+ years to this date? They are bold.

author: Neganur
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: July 16, 2018, 02:39:47 am
content: Quote from: ChunkyPastaSauce on July 16, 2018, 02:09:56 amI was wondering the same, I was under the impression that you can access the IEEE database from libraries (don't have to be a student to be a customer at university libraries in Finland).

author: ChunkyPastaSauce
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: July 16, 2018, 03:00:19 am
content: Quote from: Neganur on July 16, 2018, 02:39:47 amThe university library near me, IEEE is definitely accessible to public.

author: Navarro
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: July 17, 2018, 12:22:24 am
content: Quote from: Mechatrommer on July 14, 2018, 02:56:35 pmWe don't get a SINGLE cent out of published papers. Only the publisher is the one which gets money out of it.

author: rhb
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 17, 2018, 01:04:09 am
content: "Open Access Papers" require the authors to pay from $100 to $5000 to allow open access. Read any of the publishers web pages on "Article Publication Charges". Twenty years ago "Open Access" did not exist. Authors paid page charges and readers paid paper charges.Yes, it's completely insane and the exact opposite of what science is supposed to be. But that is the situation. The publishers want their 30+% profit margins and either the authors, readers or both must pay.

author: b_force
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 17, 2018, 11:04:20 am
content: Quote from: ChunkyPastaSauce on July 16, 2018, 03:00:19 amThat is only IEEE, there are a billion other organizations.Also, I see that as a workaround, not as a real solution.Open to the public means people are able to access it from wherever they want.You can't use a computer at the library here anymore without a membership for example.

author: Neganur
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: July 17, 2018, 01:31:57 pm
content: Apologies in advance, I don't mean to be pedantic.Does 'open to the public' exclude illiterate people then?I for one would like to believe that being available in a public library fulfills the definition of 'open to the public'. Usually library membership is free of charge, and at least the library I use offers their entire database (the material that is available in digital form) to my computer at home or onto my tablet/cellphone. And the stuff that doesn't exist in digital form I can ask to loan, or if it is rare request a photocopy (for a modest fee).I really hope that other countries' libraries offer similar services. I would gladly pay 1% more in tax for this.EDIT: But to address your original post; I agree with you that the science/research should be public documents with the exception of classified as confidential (by law) information.

author: mark03
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: July 19, 2018, 08:44:32 pm
content: The other ridiculous thing is that a big chunk (majority?) of the research getting published is supported by public grants. In the United States that means NSF (Natl. Science Foundation), NIH (Natl. Institutes of Health), DOD (Dept. of Defense), and so on. Thus, not only are the publishers asking extortionate rates for access to the research, money which goes 100% to the publisher, not the authors nor the peer reviewers nor the volunteer journal editors nor the universities; the icing on the cake is that YOU HAVE ALREADY PAID FOR THIS RESEARCH through your tax dollarsTo their credit, a handful of public funding agencies have instituted mandatory open access requirements. This is mostly in biomedical research, and seems not to have touched most of what gets published in IEEE journals.Seriously, just use Sci-Hub! Consider it training on the difference between legality and morality. And if you are currently in academia, please make sure that all of your publications are freely available in PDF format on your university's web site, or your own. (These should be "preprints", although I have never heard of action taken against a researcher by the IEEE regardless.) Mass public disobedience is the only way this situation is going to change.(my credibility: PhD in EE and several papers in IEEE journals)

author: JohnG
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: July 19, 2018, 11:54:05 pm
content: Quote from: mark03 on July 19, 2018, 08:44:32 pmWell said!

author: Pack34
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: July 20, 2018, 09:05:57 pm
content: Has no one here mentioned contacting the authors directly and requesting a copy? A lot of the time they don't receive anything of significance when you purchase through a directory. They may be happy to email a PDF. It all boils down to whatever agreement they made with the IEEE for their paper.

author: IanB
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 20, 2018, 09:19:53 pm
content: Quote from: Pack34 on July 20, 2018, 09:05:57 pmYes, that has been mentioned. Often that is the best way.

author: b_force
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 21, 2018, 03:30:26 am
content: Quote from: Pack34 on July 20, 2018, 09:05:57 pmYes a few times and they often refer to the website to buy them.

author: pamperchu
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: July 24, 2018, 07:31:07 am
content: There are some great "paper" search engines that are only accessible via Tor, not to hard to look up the .onion URL

author: djacobow
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 25, 2018, 03:28:22 pm
content: Take some heart, the situation is going to improve, perhaps slowly.I manage open-access compliance for a US national laboratory. As a result of a presidential directive (https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/sites/default/files/microsites/ostp/ostp_public_access_memo_2013.pdf), the DOE requires that all academic work (all "scientific and technical information") funded by the DOE be made open access. (https://www.energy.gov/downloads/doe-public-access-plan) What this usually means for something that was published in a closed journal is that the final published version is not made available, but the author's final manuscript, which will typically have the same content but without some formatting. The Labs are slowly coming into compliance, but it will take time. I know the DOE requirement the best, but it is my understanding that the presidential directive applies widely to almost all federally funded research. You can find US DOE work here:https://www.osti.gov/pages/Some US states have similar requirements for research they have funded, as do some universities. For example, the University of California system requires all work from academic senate faculty to be made available for open access. However, that policy will soon be expanding to include work from staff, grad students, postdocs, etc. (https://osc.universityofcalifornia.edu/open-access-policy/policy-text/presidential/). You can find UC work here:https://escholarship.org/.Furthermore, a similar requirement exists in other countries, and I think there is an EU mandate of some kind, too. I don't know the details of how that works. (https://ec.europa.eu/digital-single-market/en/open-access-scientific-information)Best,Dave

author: exe
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: July 25, 2018, 03:42:03 pm
content: Didn't read the whole thread, but, just in case, almost all authors put their papers for free online (to make it more available, get move visibility, citations, etc). Publishers may put some restrictions (like, they may not allow to put the final version, etc). Try using scholar.google.com.

author: djacobow
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 25, 2018, 04:09:16 pm
content: Quote from: exe on July 25, 2018, 03:42:03 pmI cannot speak for all authors but I know my institution, and this behavior is probably the exception not the rule. Some post open-access versions enthusiastically and others do not or do so reticently, often because they would rather people read the published closed paper than some less attractive and finished-looking open access version. It also varies by field. Some fields are insular enough that everyone the author cares about is also an academic, who will generally have institution-level access to the relevant journals. Other fields are more interested in engaging with folks outside the academic universe.

author: GeorgeOfTheJungle
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 25, 2018, 04:20:10 pm
content: If said papers are the product of some research that, for a tiny payment the uni does for a private company, rest assured it won't be seen in any public access repository.

author: djacobow
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 25, 2018, 04:41:48 pm
content: Quote from: GeorgeOfTheJungle on July 25, 2018, 04:20:10 pmIt varies by institution. Some might go in for that sort of stuff, but others have the opposite policy: one drop of institutional money and the work is in OA.

author: b_force
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 25, 2018, 04:53:21 pm
content: I have tried to contact a few people directly, but quite a few send me back to buy the paper.Maybe that has to do with the fact that they otherwise would violate the rules of the institution?

author: djacobow
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 25, 2018, 05:15:03 pm
content: Quote from: b_force on July 25, 2018, 04:53:21 pmOr they do not know, or do not care, or can't be bothered, or actively try to subvert their institutions rules, or finding out what they can and cannot do is extra work, etc. I think you will get this kind of response even from researchers at institutions that have open access policies, because, well ... reasons. Let's just say that the joke about herding cats fits perfectly in academic settings.Oh, another thing about OA policies is that they are generally not retroactive from before the policy. So if the paper is old, it may not be possible to share an open access version.

author: exe
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: July 25, 2018, 08:22:40 pm
content: Quote from: b_force on July 25, 2018, 04:53:21 pmThat's weird, in my community this is rare (I'm in cloud computing).

author: mbless
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: August 01, 2018, 02:41:46 pm
content: Quote from: b_force on July 25, 2018, 04:53:21 pmFor all of the journals I have submitted to, you would violate their copyright by posting the published paper for free, and rest assured they will make you pay for it via legal means. The exception to this is to pay the open access fee that journals are now providing. Of course that option costs $2-3k!There is a conflict in academia right now between funding and publishing open access. A lot of funding from governing bodies now require the work to be published open access, but no researcher is going to budget $2-3k per a paper to meet the open access requirement. One work around is to post the pre-print version to ResearchGate, but you have to keep in mind that it won't be peer reviewed.

author: exe
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: August 01, 2018, 05:41:30 pm
content: Quote from: mbless on August 01, 2018, 02:41:46 pmDepends on the publisher. Springer does let publishing after the article was peer reviewed, but there is 1 year embargo:https://www.springer.com/gp/open-access/authors-rights/self-archiving-policy/2124.There are workarounds for other publishers. Like, making an extended version of the paper (prior it is published) -- creating a derivative work. Of course, the extended version just contained a few more pages with some results that were simply discarded due to insignificance.

author: b_force
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 01, 2018, 07:45:42 pm
content: I have tried to get an account on ResearchGate, but without an university e-mail that doesn't work.I contacted them directly, but say "it's not for business and such"Also using my private e-mail address and a bogus fake/backup email address don't seem to work.Talking about profiling and judging people.They even advertise with that science is for everyone.

author: djacobow
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 02, 2018, 05:32:31 am
content: Quote from: mbless on August 01, 2018, 02:41:46 pmI don't know about the world, but if the US, if the work was covered under an institutional OA policy or was federally funded, you can post thefinal submitted manuscriptor theaccepted manuscriptto an OA repository. If the journal does peer review, that is a peer-reviewed version.There is no need to create a special or alternate version of your paper, there is no need to add or remove pages. Just put up the submitted version, and do NOT submit the version that the publisher has created.For example, here is Elsevier's policy:https://www.elsevier.com/about/policies/sharing.It's pretty clear (surprisingly -- clarity is not a hallmark of academic publishers) that the accepted manuscript can always be put on an OA repository. Here is the IEEE's policy:https://www.ieee.org/publications/rights/author-posting-policy.html.Personally, I would not use ResearchGate as they restrict access to registered users, and that's just an unnecessary restriction they created to garner users. Submit to a legit open access repository. If you work in an academic setting, ask the library what repository they recommend, or use something like arXiv, which does not require any sort of login to see pubs.You can find OA repositories here:http://v2.sherpa.ac.uk/opendoar/

author: mark03
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 02, 2018, 04:40:25 pm
content: Quote from: mbless on August 01, 2018, 02:41:46 pmI would be very curious to know which journals you're referring to. I've never heard of even a hint of trouble with researchers posting  papers on their own web sites, but my experience is mainly limited to IEEE journals.Also, to second @djacobow, please don't use researchgate. What a horrible web site. Bottom feeders trying to monetize the free sharing of information. What's wrong with arxiv?Bottom line though, as long as scholar.google.com returns at least one hit for a PDF copy, and anyone can download it immediately without registration, you're good.

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 11, 2018, 11:45:21 pm
content: If you want to read a paper and its behind a pay-wall, try emailing the author telling them why you want to read it. That works almost all of the time.Also, although I have not used it there are services like 'deepdyve' which let you subscribe and pay a monthly fee and get to read tons of papers as part of your membership. Also there are professional societies that will give you access to lots of content via your membership.

author: Alex
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: August 25, 2018, 02:53:35 pm
content: Just PM me which ones you are interested in.Alex

author: Technobabble_
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: November 15, 2018, 06:17:36 pm
content: These are places I've collected over the years.1. Sci Hub:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sci-Hub2. Library Genesis:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Library_GenesisThis is mostly for books, but papers and academic journals too3. In the US, some libraries have free JSTOR access; simply connect to wifi4. ArXiv:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ArXivOnly certain fields.5. ResearchGate: must need .edu address. Sign up for a class at a local community college and get one.6. NSF Public Access Repository:https://par.nsf.gov/7. Academia:https://www.academia.edu/Note: I have not used this service, so I do not know the quality.8. DOAJ i.e. Directory of Open Access Journals:https://doaj.org/9. Email the professor!10. the Directory of Open Access Repositories:http://v2.sherpa.ac.uk/opendoar/edit: thank you for additions.

author: djacobow
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 15, 2018, 06:36:33 pm
content: Quote from: Technobabble_ on November 15, 2018, 06:17:36 pmAdd the Directory of Open Access Repositories:http://v2.sherpa.ac.uk/opendoar/These are mostly institutional repositories, so will reflect the pubs that came from the institution. But for some big institutions like the University of California, this is a big trove, and will include open access versions of papers that were not pubished in OA journals.

author: Stuart Coyle
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: November 19, 2018, 02:58:55 am
content: I use thishttps://unpaywall.org/products/extensionto find accessible versions of papers. It is often successful.

author: Wan Huang Luo
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: November 19, 2018, 03:55:27 am
content: Unfortunately I can’t access my papers freely even if I want to thanks to the damn paywall. So as an author I offer condolences. I have to give the society copyright if I want to be published so thems the rules. Ugh. Fail

author: knapik
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: November 25, 2018, 03:31:39 am
content: I hope that this isn't too off topic, but I was wondering if there are ways to freely access standards, especially AS/NZS ones?

author: Marco
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 25, 2018, 06:22:02 am
content: Quote from: djacobow on August 02, 2018, 05:32:31 amNot really, the author can put it on arXiv or RePEc (neither of which cover all fields, no life sciences except for quantitative biology for instance). They can't put it on any other repository or a public university repository until after the embargo period. This is not by accident, these are simply the exceptions already carved out by superior force. Author homepages and citeseer are inferior ways to access accepted manuscripts than a curated repository ... Elsevier knows that, hence the limitations.If you want to be able to put accepted manuscripts on any OA repository which accepts it you'll need to apply more force to Elsevier.

author: b_force
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 25, 2018, 12:47:07 pm
content: Quote from: knapik on November 25, 2018, 03:31:39 amWell, not really unfortunately.There are "other ways" (if you know what I mean).This is the second thing besides research papers that is just to bizarre.We all want that people comply to standards, but apparently to also first have to pay around 200 bucks per standard.If you're a bit more serious into electronics you already need around 5-10 standards to work with.That's quite a bit of money for just a piece of paper.Yes I know, these things also have to be made and translated, but there are many different ways to pay those people.

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 26, 2018, 03:34:05 am
content: If you can't access the standard, you can't demand that it be followed

author: knapik
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: November 26, 2018, 11:57:32 am
content: Quote from: b_force on November 25, 2018, 12:47:07 pmI unfortunately don't know of those "other ways".Last time I tried accessing standards from my university the link was broken, so I just assumed that the monopolised company with the only rights to sell the standards cut off all ties with universities, and not just public libraries, however it seems to be working now. Speaking of those 5-10 standards, would you happen to be able to list out the ones that would be very helpful for me before I complete my degree?Quote from: cdev on November 26, 2018, 03:34:05 amFunnily enough, I'm pretty sure that there was a case where a motorcyclist wearing a helmet camera violated Australian standards, very recently and he successfully argued just that.

author: xyrtek
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: December 31, 2018, 05:10:58 pm
content: Quote from: b_force on July 14, 2018, 02:27:36 pmWell, technically this isn't about "Closed Access" anything either. Do you mean Journals and Publishing Companies?Technically neither the term Open Hardware nor the term Open Software mean its free*. (think free as in "free speech," not as in "free beer")Technically calling something Open Access does not auto-magically convert Journals or Publishing Companies to Closed Access.How long has the term Open Access** been around?*https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.en.html**https://www.budapestopenaccessinitiative.org/**http://legacy.earlham.edu/~peters/fos/boaifaq.htm(FAQ from above link)https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nature_(journal)https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elsevier

author: djacobow
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 03, 2019, 10:13:23 pm
content: Quote from: Wan Huang Luo on November 19, 2018, 03:55:27 amThis is interesting. I'm sure it varies by publisher. Let's look at three.1)This link describes Elsevier's policies, which covers many top journals and whose behavior is considered to be among the most aggressive by publishers:https://www.elsevier.com/about/policies/copyright.Their policy clearly states that authors can access their own work, and can even share it for "Scholarly Sharing" even for subscription (non open-access) work.Also interesting is that if you work for the US government and a few other organizations, the copyright does NOT transfer to Elsevier. The work goes into the public domain.2)IEEE's copyright rules are actually worse, IMHO, because they do require transfer of copyright in all cases:https://www.ieee.org/publications/rights/copyright-policy.htmlHowever, even under the IEEE's draconian policy, authors transfer the copyright but are granted rights to use their own papers, make copies, and reuse the material.3)The ACM's policy is different still:https://authors.acm.org/main.html.It gives the author the option to transfer copyright to ACM, retain the copyright and give an exclusive license to the ACM, or author pay's to keep all rights and publish in an ACM journal. However, even in the ACM copyright option, the author can still post the pre-print on the authors own home page, institutional repository, or any repository mandated by the agency funding the work, or any non-commercial respository that doesn't try to wholesale copy the ACM.Anyway, these are just a few examples, but if I had a point it is that policies vary substantially by publisher and you really should take the time to read them. Often, a publisher is not going to proactively inform you of your rights as an author. You've got to read the fine print.

author: Masa
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: January 05, 2019, 02:40:21 am
content: Quote from: Mechatrommer on July 16, 2018, 02:02:45 amFrom software features and quality point of view, the business model of the development is what matters a lot.Most open source projects are very small one or two developer projects, who are developing as a hobby. By other words they only implement the features they are interested in, at the time they need them, there is necessarily no support or bug fix for broken things. Of course it's going to be a crappy user experience compared to a commercially developed software with a lot of resources for development and support.But those open source projects, that are mostly developed by programmers who get paid for their work (like most Linux kernel developers), will fix bugs faster and have the resources to implement new features faster and a well working "product".So if the software is developed professionally, it doesn't really matter is it open source or closed source, it still can be high quality. Of course open source provides then other benefits.The open source model clearly works better in projects, where the software can be used by companies as a part of their own product or service. Like the Linux kernel, or the various very successful open source programming languages and tools.In most end user GUI applications like KiCad, it is more difficult to come up with a successful business model.

author: mark03
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: January 07, 2019, 04:30:37 pm
content: Quote from: djacobow on January 03, 2019, 10:13:23 pmThanks for the nice summary. However, as a practical matter, I have never known there to be an issue with authors posting preprints of their IEEE papers on personal web sites. If everyone did that, we'd be some distance toward solving this problem. Personally, as primary author of a couple of Transactions papers and a handful of conference papers, I consider it my moral duty to make those papers available outside the IEEE paywall. I don't think most researchers in academia really think about this because their experience of accessing papers online is pretty frictionless---no login required, you're automatically in based on your IP address.

author: Marco
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 07, 2019, 10:59:32 pm
content: Pre-prints generally yes. The problem is that it's academically irresponsible to not use the paper as accepted (ie. accepted manuscripts) for reference.That battle has been won too for homepages as far as Elsevier is concerned, but homepages come and go. The final line in the sand of publishers is to keep the accepted manuscripts out of trustworthy repositories for as long and as much as possible. In some areas they have been less than successful (arXiv or RePEc in the case of Elsevier, but those do not cover all fields as I said before).Really rather than depend on authors to remember all this we need universities to simply mandate submission of papers working for them to their own library, including accepted manuscripts ... and then automatically publish them after embargo ... but that costs money.

author: djacobow
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 08, 2019, 07:31:26 pm
content: Quote from: Marco on January 07, 2019, 10:59:32 pmI agree. I think this is happening, and momentum is building, but perhaps not fast enough.My institution, a US DOE lab, consistent with US DOE policy, is dead serious about making sure all the academic work from this institution is in public repositories. I know, because it's part of my day job. :-) A nearby university campus has a similar policy, perhaps minus the will to push/enforce it. But things seem to be heating up all around this area these days.

author: mark03
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: January 08, 2019, 07:31:42 pm
content: Well, if you're an academic doing "real" research then you probably have access to the real paper for free. If you're not an academic, I think a preprint should be fine. If the review process found any mistakes I definitely folded those back into my posted "preprint" version.Otherwise I mostly agree. I think change will be slow unless/until the incumbents get pulled kicking and screaming into the 21st century. This why I support "civil disobedience" efforts like sci-hub. A useful analogy can be made with the music industry. The key players would never have agreed to $1 tracks on iTunes, were it not for rampant piracy convincing them that they had two options: (1) continue watching their profits erode, or (2) embrace the new reality. Academic publishers need to be forced up against the wall in the same way. Except of course there is a strong argument that [publically funded] research papers should be free, an argument which does not obtain for the creative industries like music and film.

author: Marco
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 08, 2019, 07:37:22 pm
content: The access at my former university was broad, but it certainly wasn't universal. Not all unis have that much money to spend.

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 09, 2019, 03:28:05 am
content: "There are already too many people with knowledge and skills and expectations of a better life."</sarcasm>

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 09, 2019, 03:43:18 am
content: Quote from: mark03 on January 08, 2019, 07:31:42 pmThe problem is that "public services" are defined very narrowly internationally by default, the official definition is basically so narrow its just the government itself and any totally free services like politicians. Since 1995 a ratchet (actually its called a standstill) has been in effect and countries like the US, UK and EU have been gradually reforming their state owned enterprises and turning them to profitable use. lYou'll notice that the EU now calls them "services of general interest" not public services.The G20 countries by and large have formally declared their intent to gradually privatize big sections of what once were public services. The US, Europe and the UK are doing likewise, despite protests by organizations such asthe EUA.This is illustrated by the refusal of the US government to forgive the student loans of thousands of students who went into what they thought was public service but which is now on the fast track to privatization, like higher education. Words are important!Since higher education is now a huge international industry and universities are the gateway to facts and so who becomes empowered to annoint facts is important.Eventually, the ever widening net of progressive liberalization will ensnare public information providers too. I am surprised they still are there. I am certain their days are numbered. Government can't help non-commercial publishing because thats a 'taking' from commercial publishers.Poor people can use Wikipedia. Academic journals are for profit services so for the government to compete with them breaks the rules.Allowing it to continue indefinitely would be like suddenly having public health insurance when healthcare insurance is already a multitrillion dollar industry we are exporting to the Americans, England, Europe and the Asia-Pacific-Australia region. It just isn't consistent with todays ascendant ideology, buy or die.