◇◇新语丝(www.xys.org)(xys6.dxiong.com)(xys.liruqi.info)(xys2.dropin.org)◇◇ 学术期刊的声誉是如何得到的 ——个人见解 作者: M. Lin mlin87@ymail.com   最近看到李云龙(估计是笔名)的帖子,说Nano-Micro Letters (NML) (一个国内的Open Access journal,网址http://nmletters.org)为了提高影 响力以期被SCI收录而采用某种奖励机制(具体见李云龙(XYS20111228))。我对 NML的这种做法感到很惊讶。NML的负责人很可能不承认李云龙所揭露的内容。此 事最好的办法是那些受到“奖励”的作者们能够自己站出来说明,以纠正学术风 气。很明显,NML的这种“奖励”做法是极为不恰当的,是在明目张胆地破坏学 术规范。   一个真正的学者,追逐学术声誉对他(她)来说可能不是最重要的,但对于 学术期刊,声誉与影响力对它来说却是至关重要的。声誉好的刊物能够吸引优秀 的作品;刊登重要的工作又能进一步提高刊物的影响力,形成良性循环。反过来, 那些声誉较差的刊物,由于标准低,吸收的是水平很低的文章……形成恶性循环。   那么学术期刊是如何获得自身的声誉与影响力呢?鉴于本人的专业,我用的 例子主要是有关数学方面。   主编的声誉是一个因素,他(她)应该在比较广泛的数学领域做过出色贡献。 在创刊初期,杂志主编都会邀请一些知名学者在该刊物上发表作品来获得初步的 知名度。在一个杂志上,有一些好的作品所带来的影响是不可估量的。现如今在 Mathematische Annalen 的介绍上还都能看到这些昔日熟悉的主编的名字Felix Klein, David Hilbert, Jean-Pierre Bourguigon等。而较新的期刊The Asian Journal of Mathematics,它的成功也是靠这样来实践的 http://www.ims.cuhk.edu.hk/~ajm/AJM_contributors.pdf   Editorial board members 的选定是很重要的,因为the editors and editorial boards bear the primary scientific responsibility for guiding a journal (详细可见 http://www.mathunion.org/fileadmin/CEIC/bestpractice/bpfinal.pdf)。 Editorial board members的research interest要比较全面。如发表一般 (general)数学话题的 Proc. Amer. Math. Soc., 它的Editorial board虽然 不可能把所有的current interest in mathematical research都包括,但主要 分支还是包含的挺全面的。就算是专业性非常明确的Linear Algebra Appl.,它 的Editorial board也要包括组合矩阵论, 数值线性代数,表示论,李代数,算 子理论等等。除了Editorial board members自身的学术水平,他们的 affiliations最好是来自不同国家的高水平的学术机构。所谓集思广益,获得更 多更优秀的作品。以前常常收到印度新办杂志的 Editorial board membership 邀请,我也感到惊讶(自己尚未觉得已经做出特别重要的贡献),出于好奇,我 就答应了一份邀请。很快,我就要求退出Editorial board,因为我在这个杂志 所在的publisher看到了令人非常吃惊的事情。很难想象一个作者能在一期的刊 物上 署名一半以上的文章,但是这位日本作者Tadayoshi Takebayashi 在 Pioneer Journal of Mathematics and Mathematical Sciences 却做到了,请 看   14篇有10篇http://www.pspchv.com/content_2_PJMMS_volume_2.html   12篇有8篇 http://www.pspchv.com/content_1_PJMMS_volume_2.html   好像他还没有停止的迹象。我对揭露日本人的疯狂不感兴趣。看看 Editorial board上,好像还挺多中国人的 http://www.pspchv.com/editorial_board.html ……这个杂志注定是失败的。   一个学术期刊的良好运作,很难把握,但却很关键的环节是选择专业且负责 任的审稿人(关于referees的重要作用亦可见此 http://www.mathunion.org/fileadmin/CEIC/bestpractice/bpfinal.pdf)。之 前我读过一篇山东大学学报上刊出的(数学类)文章,第一感觉就是,负责审理 这篇文章的人极不称职。审稿人怎么能推荐刊登这样低水平的文章?我发email 问过作者,他告诉我,为了满足学校考核,而且发表在这个刊物上的文章他们学 校能奖励人民币四千……我无言以对。 我最近给一个杂志审理稿件,除了 referee’s report,还需要填一个综合评价,才知道这个杂志的做法是多么细 致,现提供如下,可供参考 EVALUATION A. Suitability of topic 1. Would the topic appeal to a knowledgeable individual outside the topic field? [ ] Yes [ ] Perhaps [ ] Probably not 2. Is the topic important to researchers within the topic field? [ ] Yes [ ] Moderately so [ ] Not really 3. Would it be timely to publish a paper now on this topic? [ ] Yes [ ] Somewhat premature [ ] Probably too late B. Content 1. Is the paper technically sound? [ ] Yes [ ] No 2. Is the coverage of the topic sufficiently comprehensive and balanced? [ ] Yes [ ] Important parts of the topic are missing or treated superficially [ ] Somewhat unbalanced treatment, but not seriously so [ ] Certain parts greatly overstressed 3. How would you describe the technical depth of the paper? [ ] Superficial [ ] Suitable for the nonspecialist (knowledgeable individual outside the topic field) [ ] Appropriate for a worker in the topic field [ ] At an expert level 4. Do you consider the paper to be authoritative? [ ] Yes [ ] No [ ] Perhaps 5. Do you consider the content of the paper of high quality and originality? [ ] Yes [ ] Open to some question [ ] Not really C. Presentation 1. Do the title and abstract provide a clear, accurate indication of the material presented? [ ] Yes [ ] No 2. Is there sufficient introductory material for the nonspecialist? [ ] Yes [ ] Probably not [ ] No 3. Is the paper better suited for an expert in the field than for the nonspecialist? [ ] Yes [ ] Maybe [ ] No 4. Are symbols, terms, and concepts defined to the extent necessary for a reader not familiar with the topic? [ ] Yes [ ] Not always [ ] Frequently not 5. Are the discussions in the paper clear and well-founded? [ ] Yes [ ] Not always [ ] Poor 6. How would you rate the overall organization of the paper? [ ] Satisfactory [ ] Could be improved [ ] Poor 7. Are the references complete and accurate? [ ] Yes [ ] No 8. How do you rate the English? [ ] Satisfactory [ ] Could be improved [ ] Poor D. Summary 1. How would you rate the literary style of the paper? [ ] Excellent [ ] Good [ ] Fair [ ] Poor 2. How would you rate the quality and originality of the paper? [ ] Excellent [ ] Good [ ] Fair [ ] Poor 3. How accessible is the paper to the nonspecialist? [ ] Completely [ ] Mostly [ ] Partially [ ] Not at all 4. How would you rate the tutorial value of the paper to the nonspecialist? [ ] High [ ] Average [ ] Low 5. How would the paper be perceived by specialists in the topic field? [ ] Excellent [ ] Good [ ] Fair [ ] Poor 6. Overall, how would you rate this paper? [ ] Excellent [ ] Good [ ] Fair [ ] Poor CONFIDENTIAL COMMENTS FOR THE EDITOR:   近年来,各种学术期刊应运而生(不少是Open access Journal), 来满足 日益增长的科技工作者的需要。数学类Open access的 学术期刊好像对稿件的录 用标准并不高,因为我看过不少来自上面的文章,大体印象是这些文章都很平凡。 如 http://www.hindawi.com/subjects/ 上面的数学类期刊(虽然也有几个看似 被正规的SCI收录,很多国内的学者估计就是奔这个来的)。 我们知道有两 个杂志:一个是Advances in Mathematics,另一个是Advances in Applied Mathematics,这两个是由Elsevier出版的,是高水平的刊物。不久前(是去年), 运用类比Scientific Research Publishing 推出Advances in Pure Mathematics http://www.scirp.org/journal/apm/ ,不经意间浏览了这篇文章 之后On Open Problems of Nonnegative Inverse Eigenvalues Problem http://www.scirp.org/journal/PaperInformation.aspx?paperID=6407 我第一 感觉是杂志的滥用名称(它完全是招人眼球,浪费别人时间罢了)。我并没说 Elsevier出版的期刊都是好的, 比如这些期刊的声誉并不:Applied Mathematics and Computation,Computers & Mathematics with Applications, Applied Mathematics Letters, Mathematical and computer modelling,  我接触过不少发表在上面的文章。特别是Applied Mathematics and Computation,Math Reviewers基本都不愿花时间给它上面的文章写评论。   Open access Journal一般都收取发表费用,费用一般在$600到 $1000,这 折合人民币也不是小数目。如果发表一篇文章学校方面就提供你经费$600到 $1000,那么我估计国内很多人都不会往Open access 的期刊上投稿。   最初,国内评定研究成果是只考虑数量,之后加上研究成果是否被SCI摘录, 后来还考虑SCI期刊的impact factor。所谓的SCI (Science Citation Index) 可能更适用于理化生工农医,数学是很特别的学科,特别是基础数学的东西,例 如这里有一份比利时数学会的Official statement of the BMS concerning the use of the Science Citation Index and Impact Factors for the assessment of mathematics (详见 http://bms.ulb.ac.be/documents/scieng.pdf)。 而且我们已经知道杂志的 影响因子或文章的被引用次数在实际中是很容易被造假的 (详细请看, http://www.ima.umn.edu/~arnold/siam-columns/integrity-under-attack.pdf  我08年阅读何吉欢的文章时,就已经惊讶于他如此往复的使用简单论证来炮 制那么多东西,但那时我没有注意到他的misconduct……现在何的做法,某种程 度上损坏了国人的学术形象,可是我猜测还有不少人在继续他的做法,谁知道 呢?)    最后,向那些关心国内学术期刊健康发展的人表示敬意。 (XYS20120104) ◇◇新语丝(www.xys.org)(xys6.dxiong.com)(xys.liruqi.info)(xys2.dropin.org)◇◇