102

This is a question about how to use bibtex to cite a preprint from Arxiv. Suppose I have:

@ARTICLE{BM:1999,
   AUTHOR  = {First, Author AND Second, Author},
   TITLE   = {The title of this article},
   YEAR    = {2035},
   JOURNAL = What exactly do I put here?,
   VOLUME  = {},
   NUMBER  = {},
   PAGES   = {}
}

Where exactly do I put the code of the article in arxiv? Suppose the code is arXiv:1234:5678v1

I am using 

\bibliographystyle{alpha}  % (uses file "plain.bst")amsplain
\bibliography{myrefs}    % expects file "myrefs.bib"

*EDIT:*Actually there is a BibTeX entry that is @unpublished which is the one I am using. I didn't noticed and I put @article in the example above. It has fields: author, title, note, month, year and key. So the question is more about whether to put the arxiv code of the article in note or in key.

|improve this question
60

It's also worth mentioning Biblatex, which has proper support for eprints with all styles. For arXiv, specifically, you can use 

archivePrefix = {arXiv},
       eprint = {0902.0885},
 primaryClass = {quant-ph},
for a new-style eprint, or

archivePrefix = {arXiv},
   eprint = {quant-ph/0401062},
for an old-style eprint.

Both entries were taken directly from the NASA ADS database, clicking on "Export". The journal field you left empty, except of course if has actually been published elsewhere. As for the template, it depends on the style you are using. I use @article with the style biblatex-phys, and the formatting is good, but with the default style it produces crap if journal is empty. In this case you can use @misc and @online, with similar results. You should avoid @unpublished, however, as it hides the eprint number.

EDIT: Updated to take into account the comments.

|improve this answer
  • 6
    I disagree that the formatting as @article is good. You get something of the form ... In: (2015) if you omit the journal field, which looks strange... – Jonathan Nov 19 '15 at 16:28
  • Yeah the missing "in" is really odd. – Andreas Mueller Apr 26 '16 at 15:57
  • 1
    Unfortunately arXiv itself is still using texlive 2011 which is completely incompatible with the version of biblatex in texlive 2016. – Najib Idrissi Sep 7 '16 at 7:22
  • 6
    I would advise to use the @misc type, as it officially allows the fields eprint, eprintclass, and eprinttype, as opposed to @unpublished, and @online. @article requires journaltitle, as @Jonathan pointed out. See biblatex documentation (2.1 Entry Types and 3.12. Electronic Publishing Information) – moi Sep 16 '16 at 8:29
  • is there a reason why you use double quotes for new-style eprints but brackets for old-style ones? – glS Jan 28 at 12:19
75

This is what I do

  1. Go to arXiv site: e.g. https://arxiv.org/abs/q-alg/9503002
  2. Click NASA ADS link under References and Citations e.g. http://adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/bib_query?arXiv:q-alg/9503002
  3. Click Bibtex entry for this abstract e.g. http://adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-bib_query?bibcode=1995q.alg.....3002B&data_type=BIBTEX&db_key=PRE&nocookieset=1
  4. Copy/paste into Bibtex file.
  5. Delete everything before @ symbol.
|improve this answer
  • 5
    This is ridiculously useful, I wish I knew about this before... – sdf Jul 6 '17 at 16:13
  • 2
    May I suggest a 6th step? 6. Check the for the most common mistakes in automatically created bib entries, see https://tex.stackexchange.com/q/386053/36296 – user36296 May 18 '18 at 11:59
  • 3
    Now after the NASA ADS link, you can go to "Export" tab on the left and choose BibTex – bingung Jan 25 at 10:25
15

General arXiv citations are explained in the arXiv help. The correct citation format depends on whether it is an "old style" arXiv reference (eg arXiv:hep-ph/9609357) or "new style" (eg arXiv:0807.2882 [cond-mat.mes-hall]).

The REVTeX4.1 bibstyles also support arXiv references.

AMS styles, I can't help....

|improve this answer
  • +1 for eprint, that's as much of a standard as I've ever seen. If the AMS styles don't use it, then that's an AMS-specific issue. You can modify the Bibtex style to include the eprint field if it's important to you. – David Z Oct 6 '10 at 22:36
  • 3
    Neither eprint nor url are standard fields in the current BibTeX. You can't hardly fault a style for not implementing a non-standard field. (Though I thought I heard a rumour here that the next version of BibTeX will have proper support of electronic documents.) – Willie Wong Oct 6 '10 at 23:02
  • Just a comment on David Zaskavsky's comment: There is a lovely little script called urlbst that adds support for the eprint and url fields (and various other kinds of web link e.g. DOI's and PubMed) to an existing bst file. It works fine on the AMS styles. – David Loeffler Oct 7 '10 at 11:14
13

I usually leave journal blank, or put in the word "pre-print". The arXiv information I usually put in note, since the AMS styles ignore the eprint field. When I get less lazy I sometimes use, instead of the @article document type, @misc.

|improve this answer
  • This more like what I was asking. Now, it would be good to know if this is standard and even more if AMS has some guideline in this case. – Anna Taurogenireva Oct 6 '10 at 21:17
  • 1
    Actually there is a bibtex entry that is @unpublished which is the one I am using. I didn't noticed and I put @article in the example above. It has fields: author, title, note, month, year and key. So the question is more about whether to put the arxiv code of the article in note or in key. – Anna Taurogenireva Oct 6 '10 at 21:27
  • 1
    Nevermind. Key is a field that is ignored and not printed, so it can not be there. Then I think it should be in NOTE as you said. – Anna Taurogenireva Oct 6 '10 at 21:39
  • What exactly should be in the note field? The full URL or just the arXiv id? – Erel Segal-Halevi Feb 16 '15 at 17:40
  • 1
    @ErelSegalHalevi: there is no "should", since I don't think it is standardized. But I generally just put the arXiv id such as arXiv:gr-qc/XXXXXXX or arXiv:XXXX.XXXX Remember, absent an actual style guide from a journal, the main goal of the bibliography is to make the references findable by readers. The arXiv id (properly formatted) is sufficient to uniquely identify a pre-print, so it is generally good enough. – Willie Wong Feb 17 '15 at 8:19
8

DBLP, which generally produces good BibTeX files, formats an archive entry as:

@article{DBLP:journals/corr/abs-1207-0016,
  author    = {Ruchen Duan Yingbin Liang},
  title     = {Bounds and Capacity Theorems for Cognitive Interference
               Channels with State},
  journal   = {CoRR},
  volume    = {abs/1207.0016},
  year      = {2012},
  ee        = {http://arxiv.org/abs/1207.0016},
  bibsource = {DBLP, http://dblp.uni-trier.de}
}

(http://dblp.uni-trier.de/rec/bibtex/journals/corr/abs-1207-0016)

|improve this answer
  • 1
    This format does not follow the guideline given on arxiv.org, and I won't understand the reference personally if the URL is not shown. – xuhdev Mar 9 '16 at 4:32
3

For compiling my list of publications I use the bibtex entry that Spires provides for each record. You can search the author and date to find the Spires entry.

|improve this answer
1

@misc is the best solution. Just specify archivePrefix="arXiv", and the eprint id, as in Mateus's answer.

@article shows a blank In: field, and @unpublished doesn't show an arXiv id, but @misc shows author, title, year, and arXiv id.

|improve this answer

protected by user31729 Mar 24 '15 at 15:44

Thank you for your interest in this question. Because it has attracted low-quality or spam answers that had to be removed, posting an answer now requires 10 reputation on this site (the association bonus does not count).

Would you like to answer one of these unanswered questions instead?

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.