CS publishing: The least you should know if you consider yourself
an expert
Digital libraries of the four major CS publishers
(Access to full texts requires subscription.)
Bibliographic/review/citation databases
Repositories
The tricky business of peer review
- A. J. Smith. The task of a referee. Computer, v. 23, n. 4,
pp. 65-71, 1990. article
at IEEE CS website
- I. Parberry. A guide for new referees in theoretical computer
science. SIGACT News, v. 20, n. 4, pp. 92-99, 1989. doi:
10.1145/74074.74090. Reprinted in Inform. and Comput.,
v. 112, n. 1, pp. 96-116, 1994. doi:
10.1006/inco.1994.1053
- S. Santini. We are sorry to inform you... Computer, v. 38,
n. 12, pp. 128, 126-127, 2005. doi:
10.1109/mc.2005.423
- P. E. Bourne, A. Korngreen. Ten simple rules for
reviewers. PLoS Comput. Biol., v. 2, n. 9, article e110, 2006. doi:
10.1371/journal.pcbi.0020110
- M. Allman. Thoughts on reviewing. ACM SIGCOMM
Comput. Commun. Rev., v. 38, n. 2, pp. 47-50, 2008. doi:
10.1145/1355734.1355741
- G. Cormode. How not to review a paper: the tools and techniques
of the adversarial reviewer. ACM SIGMOD Record, v. 37, n. 4,
pp. 100-104, 2009. doi:
10.1145/1519103.1519122
- T. Anderson. Conference reviewing considered harmful. ACM
SIGOPS Oper. Syst. Rev., v. 43, n. 2, pp. 108-116, 2009. doi:
10.1145/1531793.1531815
- B. Meyer. Open refereeing: why I sign my reviews. Letter. article
at his website
- H. Thimbleby. On refereeing computer science. Note. article at his
website
Quality of publishers
Meaningfulness of bibliometrics
- A. A. Goodrum, K. W. McCain, S. Lawrence, C. L. Giles. Scholarly
publishing in the Internet age: a citation analysis of computer
science literature. Inform. Process. and Manag., v. 37, n. 5,
pp. 661-675, 2001. doi:
10.1016/s0306-4573(00)00047-9
- V. Petricek, I. J. Cox, H. Han, I.G. Councill,
C. L. Giles. Modeling the author bias between two on-line computer
science citation databases. In Proc. of WWW 2005,
pp. 1062-1063. ACM Press, 2005. doi:
10.1145/1062745.1062869
- J. Bar-Ilan. An ego-centric citation analysis of the works of
Michael O. Rabin based on multiple citation
indexes. Inform. Process. and Manag., v. 42, n. 6,
pp. 1553-1566, 2006. doi:
10.1016/j.ipm.2006.03.019
- D. L. Parnas. Stop the numbers game. Commun. of ACM,
v. 50, n. 11, pp. 19-21, 2007. doi:
10.1145/1297797.1297815
- A.-M. Kermarrec, E. Faou, J.-P. Merlet, P. Robert,
L. Segoufin. What do bibliometric indicators measure? INRIA evaluation
committee report, 2007. report
at INRIA website
- H. F. Moed, M. S. Visser. Developing bibliometric indicators of
research performance in computer science: an exploratory study. Leiden
Univ. report to NWO, 2007. report
at U Leiden website
- F. Mattern. Bibliometric evaluation of computer science. Slides
of ECSS 2008 keynote. material
at conference website
- R. Adler, J. Ewing, P. Taylor. Citation statistics. IMU
report. report
at IMU website
- Bibliometrics and the curators of
orthodoxy. Math. Struct. in Comput. Sci., v. 19, n. 1, pp. 1-4,
2009. Editorial signed by the whole editorial board. doi:
10.1017/s0960129508007391
- B. Meyer, C. Choppy, J. Staunstrup, J. van Leeuwen. Research
evaluation for computer science. Commun. of ACM, v. 52, n. 4,
pp. 31-34, 2009. doi:
10.1145/1498765.1498780
- P. A. Lawrence. The mismeasurement of science. Current
Biology, v. 17, n. 15, pp. R583-R585, 2007. doi:
j.cub.2007.06.014
- F. Laloe, R. Mossery. Bibliometric evaluation of individual
researchers: not even right... not even wrong! Europhysics
News, v. 40, n. 5, pp. 26-29, 2009. doi:
10.1051/epn/2009704
- O. Rodriguez-Ruiz. The citation indexes and the quantification of
knowledge. J. of Educ. Admin., v. 47, n. 2, pp. 250-266,
2009. doi:
10.1108/09578230910941075
Online publishing, open access