0

I am quite often confronted with papers (conference proceedings) that are very cut down due to length limiations. Often authors then would publish an extended version of their paper on arXiv. I would like to print this in my bibliography e.g. as Author, "Title", Journal etc., extended version: arxiv-id. Now I do not know you to realise this relation properly with biblatex. I see two approaches:

Keep published and extended as two different entries in my bibliography and link them:

\documentclass{scrartcl}
\usepackage[backend=biber]{biblatex}
\usepackage{filecontents}
\begin{filecontents}{biblio.bib}
    @article{published,
        title={Title}, author={Author}, journal={Journal}, year={2021},
        related={extended}, relatedstring={extended version}
    }
    @online{extended,
        title={Title}, author={Author}, year={2021}, 
        eprint={12345}, eprinttype={arxiv}}
    }
\end{filecontents}
\addbibresource{biblio.bib}
\begin{document}
    \nocite{*}
    \printbibliography
\end{document}

This is ugly because it prints the title and year twice. Maybe it is good because the published and the extended version are two separate documents. But then I do not know how to print the entry nicely.

The alternative I see abuses the eprintclass-field:

\documentclass{scrartcl}
\usepackage[backend=biber]{biblatex}
\usepackage{filecontents}
\begin{filecontents}{biblioa.bib}
    @article{published,
        title={Title}, author={Author}, journal={Journal}, year={2021},
        eprint={12345}, eprinttype={arxiv}, eprintclass={extended version}}
    }
\end{filecontents}
\addbibresource{biblioa.bib}
\begin{document}
    \nocite{*}
    \printbibliography
\end{document}

Of course this prints ugly, but maybe that can be fixed (how? I am too unexperienced with writing styles I guess). More severely, I think it is a bad idea to use the eprintclass-field for something else than it is intended for.

What would be a suitable approach?

2
  • For things that are difficult to express with existing fields usually the note field is convenient (note={extended version: arxiv-id}). Of course this does not allow for structured processing by a style but it seems sufficient for your purposes - and reasonably semantically correct as well.
    – Marijn
    Mar 10, 2021 at 10:51
  • @Marijn: which leaves me with finding out how biblatex formats the arxiv-id and makes a hyperlink out of it. Do you know the names of the relevant macros?
    – Bubaya
    Mar 10, 2021 at 13:12

1 Answer 1

1

I like the related approach. If you are not happy with the default output, you can define your own relatedtype and customise its output.

In the following we define arxivversion, which prints the arXiv link and title and date if they differ from the published version.

\documentclass{scrartcl}
\usepackage[backend=biber]{biblatex}

\newbibmacro*{related:arxivversion}[1]{%
  \entrydata*{#1}{%
    \iffieldsequal{title}{savedtitle}
      {}
      {\usebibmacro{title}}%
    \newunit
    \ifdatesequal{}{saved}
      {}
      {\printdate}%
    \newunit
    \usebibmacro{doi+eprint+url}}}

\begin{filecontents}{\jobname.bib}
@article{published,
  title         = {Title},
  author        = {Author},
  journal       = {Journal},
  year          = {2021},
  related       = {extended},
  relatedtype   = {arxivversion},
  relatedstring = {\autocap{e}xtended version},
}
@online{extended,
  title      = {Title},
  author     = {Author},
  year       = {2021}, 
  eprint     = {12345},
  eprinttype = {arxiv},
}
\end{filecontents}
\addbibresource{\jobname.bib}
\begin{document}
  \nocite{published}
  \printbibliography
\end{document}

Author. “Title”. In: Journal (2021). Extended version arXiv: 12345.

1
  • That looks good! I would never have been able to implement the logic behind the omission of identical title and date.
    – Bubaya
    Mar 11, 2021 at 10:14

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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