143

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*EDIT:*Actually there is a BibTeX entry that is @unpublished which is the one I am using.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
2

8 Answers 8

Reset to default
78

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 You should avoid @unpublished, however, as it hides the eprint number.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
5
  • 9
    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, 2015 at 16:28
  • Yeah the missing "in" is really odd.
    – Andreas Mueller
    Apr 26, 2016 at 15:57
  • 3
    Unfortunately arXiv itself is still using texlive 2011 which is completely incompatible with the version of biblatex in texlive 2016.
    – Najib Idrissi
    Sep 7, 2016 at 7:22
  • 11
    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advise to use the @misc type, as it officially allows the fields eprint, eprintclass, and eprinttype, as opposed to @unpublished, and @online.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, 2016 at 8:29
  • anyone else experience that archivePrefix in one bibtex entry makes the hidden links in the pdf ALL get prefixed by the value of archivePrefix (ie arxiv.org)? This is using apsrev-title.bst
    – mostlyWright
    Apr 28, 2020 at 20:39
136

This is what I do

  1. Go to arXiv site: e.g. https://arxiv.org/abs/q-alg/9503002
  2. On the right, click "Export Bibtex Citation"
  3. Copy and paste the citation into your bibtex file
  4. (Optional) Check for the most common mistakes in automatically created bib entries Software-generated bibliographic entries: common errors and other mistakes to check before use
Improve this answer
1
  • 13
    This is ridiculously useful, I wish I knew about this before...
    – Stiofán Fordham
    Jul 6, 2017 at 16:13
16

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
5
  • 1
    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, 2010 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, 2010 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, 2010 at 21:39
  • What exactly should be in the note field? The full URL or just the arXiv id?
    – Erel Segal-Halevi
    Feb 16, 2015 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, 2015 at 8:19
14

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
3
  • +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, 2010 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, 2010 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, 2010 at 11:14
10

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
3
  • 2
    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, 2016 at 4:32
  • The output is not correct since CoRR does not include the stat, math, physics, econ, and other fields in the arXiv.
    – jII
    May 31, 2021 at 0:21
  • 1
    This helped me! The sample BibTeX from arXiv itself was largely ignored by natbib: all I could get printed was title, author names, and years. Switched to the DLPB-generated version and now everything prints, including arXiv numbers and URL.
    – sh37211
    Sep 13, 2021 at 22:29
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
0

A Chrome extension called 'Librarian' from Fermat’s Library can extract citation in BibTeX format directly from arXiv:

https://fermatslibrary.com/librarian

Improve this answer

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