arXiv’s computer science (CS) category has updated its moderation practice with respect to review (or survey) articles and position papers. Before being considered for submission to arXiv’s CS category, review articles and position papers must now be accepted at a journal or a conference and complete successful peer review. When submitting review articles or position papers, authors must include documentation of successful peer review to receive full consideration. Review/survey articles or position papers submitted to arXiv without this documentation will be likely to be rejected and not appear on arXiv.

This change is being implemented due to the unmanageable influx of review articles and position papers to arXiv CS.

Is this a policy change?

Technically, no! If you take a look at arXiv’s policies for specific content types you’ll notice that review articles and position papers are not (and have never been) listed as part of the accepted content types. Review articles and position papers have, in the past, only been accepted at moderator discretion, because the few we received were of high quality and of interest to arXiv readers and the scientific community at large.

Why is the arXiv CS category making this change?

In the past few years, arXiv has been flooded with papers. Generative AI / large language models have added to this flood by making papers – especially papers not introducing new research results – fast and easy to write. While categories across arXiv have all seen a major increase in submissions, it’s particularly pronounced in arXiv’s CS category.

The goal of this change of practice is to:

• Help arXiv readers more easily find valuable review articles and position papers written by subject matter experts
• Free up moderators to focus on the content types officially accepted by arXiv, reduce submission hold times, and keep the pace of scientific discovery going!

**Above all, the core purpose of arXiv is to share research papers and facilitate scientific discovery quickly and freely. **We are making this change in support of that mission.

In the past, arXiv CS received a relatively small amount of review or survey articles, and those we did receive were of extremely high quality, written by senior researchers at the request of publications like Annual Reviews, Proceedings of the IEEE, and Computing Surveys. Position paper submissions to arXiv were similarly rare, and usually produced by scientific societies or government study groups (for example,the Computing Research Association of the National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine). While, as now, these papers were not content types officially accepted by arXiv, the arXiv moderators accepted them because of their scholarly value to the research community.

Fast forward to present day – submissions to arXiv in general have risen dramatically, and we now receive hundreds of review articles every month. The advent of large language models have made this type of content relatively easy to churn out on demand, and the majority of the review articles we receive are little more than annotated bibliographies, with no substantial discussion of open research issues.

arXiv believes that there are position papers and review articles that are of value to the scientific community, and we would like to be able to share them on arXiv. However, our team of volunteer moderators do not have the time or bandwidth to review the hundreds of these articles we receive without taking time away from our core purpose, which is to share research articles.

Reasonable and trusted outside refereed venues already exist (conferences and journals) which solicit position papers and review articles on subjects of concern or interest to our readers (such as concerns over privacy, ethics, safety, and security of recent CS technologies, particularly applications of artificial intelligence) and as part of that process, they conduct in-depth review to assure quality, evidential support of opinions, and scholarly value. Since arXiv does not have the resources to conduct this quality-control in-house for content types that we do not officially accept, this change of practice is allowing us to rely on these refereed venues to do so for us so that we can still share position papers and review articles of value on arXiv.

**How do I submit my review article or position paper to arXiv? **Before submission to arXiv, have your review article or position paper accepted to a refereed venue with peer review like a journal or a conference. Review articles or position papers must be accepted to a journal or conference before being submitted to arXiv and you must have documentation of complete and successful peer review.

Please note: the review conducted at conference workshops generally does not meet the same standard of rigor of traditional peer review and is not enough to have your review article or position paper accepted to arXiv.

**How do I show my review article or position paper has successfully completed peer review? **When you submit to arXiv, please include the peer reviewed journal reference and DOI metadata. If you do not provide this, your review article or position paper will likely be rejected.

**Can I resubmit my position paper or review article after being rejected? **If your position paper or review article was rejected because it did not complete a successful peer review process, you can submit an appeal request to resubmit if your article has since completed a successful peer review process. Do not resubmit your position paper or review article without an accepted appeal. Here are the instructions for how to appeal.

**I have a scientific paper studying the impact of science and technology in society. Can I submit this to arXiv without peer review? **Yes, arXiv has always released these types of scientific papers, for example in cs.CY or physics.soc-ph. These are scientific research papers and are not subject to this moderation practice change.

**Will other categories on arXiv also change their practice re: review articles and position papers? **Each category of arXiv has different moderators, who are subject matter experts with a terminal degree in their particular subject, to best serve the scholarly pursuits, goals, and standards of their category. While all moderators adhere to arXiv policy, the only policy arXiv has in place with regard to review articles and position papers is that they are not a generally accepted content type. The goal of the moderators of each category is to make sure the work being submitted is actually science, and that it is of potential interest to the scientific community. If other categories see a similar rise in LLM-written review articles and position papers, they may choose to change their moderation practices in a similar manner to better serve arXiv authors and readers. We will make these updates public if and when they do occur.