This is a public forum for people to suggest and discuss opinions about the proceedings of the ANTS conference. I hope that an open, respectful and focussed discussion can take place.

The main topic is the publication model for the proceedings of ANTS.

To recall: The first 9 conferences had pre-proceedings published in Springer Lecture Notes in Computer Science. The 2012 conference has post-proceedings published (open access) by Mathematical Science Publishers. See the conference webpage for further details. It will be interesting to see how this goes.

There are several possible options to consider:

– continue with Mathematical Science Publishers

– revert to Springer LNCS

– try to have the proceedings published as a special issue of a journal (which one?)

– move to a book series by another publisher, such as AMS Contemporary Mathematics

Some factors to consider in the choice:

– respectability and citation indexing for mathematicians

– respectability and citation indexing for computer scientists

– cost

– open access?

– pre-proceedings or post-proceedings?

Please add your comments/suggestions/opinions to this post.

### Like this:

Like Loading...

To get this discussion started, let me add a fact that did not surface during the ANTS X business meeting. When we, the ANTS X organizers, investigated the options for proceedings, we ruled out an AMS book series because AMS did not offer electronic editions of their books. Since then, they have begun to do so at least for Contemporary Mathematics, which would be the most likely candidate for a volume like the ANTS proceedings.

There do remain other negatives with AMS. For one, they do not currently offer Open Access, though perhaps one can negotiate this (I haven’t tried). Also, Contemporary Mathematics does publish a lot of conferences, so they may not be seen as being so selective (and of course it’s a book series rather than a journal).

I may have more to report on the pros and cons of our current arrangement once we get further into the process. In the meantime, I would encourage everyone connected to ANTS to think about the issues and weigh in!

My preferences would be with AMS Contemporary Mathematics. I have been involved several time in publishing Fq-series proceedings with them and each time it was a trouble-free experience, yet with a lot of quality control from the AMS — something what Springer failed to provide.

Though I have never been a participant to ANTS but only a reader of the proceedings, I would like to emphasize the fact that “Open Access” very often means “Gold Open Access”, in other words “author-is-paying model”. A huge number of mathematicians are definitely *against* such a model, whose biases are well-known. Open access also means “Green Open Access” where papers are freely available, possibly after an embargo time from a subscribed journal, or available as preprint versions on repositories like ArXiv. I would hence suggest to be cautious about the words “Open Access”.

I think we can safely say that this discussion didn’t go anywhere