Same review for Math Reviews and Zentralblatt
up vote
19
down vote
favorite
I have been serving for several years as a reviewer for both Mathematical Reviews (MathSciNet) and ZbMath.
Earlier this year, I received an invitation for a paper for MR which I already reviewed for ZbMath. I dug up my old review and submitted it to MathSciNet without giving it much thought.
But there seems to be a pattern emerging. I received an invitation from MR for two more papers I already reviewed for ZbMath.
So here are my questions:
- Do the editors of MR know/check who reviewed the paper for ZbMath in order
to find suitable reviewers? - What do I do about the double reviews?
My idea was to just refuse to write the reviews. But if the answer to the first question would be yes, then the editors know that I have a thorough review lying around. Just resubmitting this one would save a colleague from writing a new one.
mathematics peer-review
asked Nov 28 at 0:16
Choky
985
add a comment |
up vote
19
down vote
favorite
I have been serving for several years as a reviewer for both Mathematical Reviews (MathSciNet) and ZbMath.
Earlier this year, I received an invitation for a paper for MR which I already reviewed for ZbMath. I dug up my old review and submitted it to MathSciNet without giving it much thought.
But there seems to be a pattern emerging. I received an invitation from MR for two more papers I already reviewed for ZbMath.
So here are my questions:
- Do the editors of MR know/check who reviewed the paper for ZbMath in order
to find suitable reviewers? - What do I do about the double reviews?
My idea was to just refuse to write the reviews. But if the answer to the first question would be yes, then the editors know that I have a thorough review lying around. Just resubmitting this one would save a colleague from writing a new one.
mathematics peer-review
asked Nov 28 at 0:16
Choky
985
3
@BryanKrause I think these are different topics: this is about reviews (after publication) and the other one about referee reports.
– Christian
Nov 28 at 6:34
2
Many times I've seen ZbMath reviews (indeed, print versions from 1990s and earlier) that indicated, either at the beginning or at the end (I think it was at the end), that the review was from Math. Reviews, maybe something like "(MR 86c:30018)" (parentheses included; since this is almost certainly a true review number, I'm not claiming what I'm saying is the case for this review). However, I never knew whether such cases are as you describe or whether they just asked to use the MR review because they couldn't obtain a suitable review for some reason. And I've seen the reverse also.
– Dave L Renfro
Nov 28 at 8:38
@DaveLRenfro I wrote one of these (more recently). zbMath assigned me the same item (by chance I think) and they offered that I could submit the same review as to MR (see my answer below for more details)
– Christian
Nov 28 at 8:50
add a comment |
up vote
19
down vote
favorite
up vote
19
down vote
favorite
I have been serving for several years as a reviewer for both Mathematical Reviews (MathSciNet) and ZbMath.
Earlier this year, I received an invitation for a paper for MR which I already reviewed for ZbMath. I dug up my old review and submitted it to MathSciNet without giving it much thought.
But there seems to be a pattern emerging. I received an invitation from MR for two more papers I already reviewed for ZbMath.
So here are my questions:
- Do the editors of MR know/check who reviewed the paper for ZbMath in order
to find suitable reviewers? - What do I do about the double reviews?
My idea was to just refuse to write the reviews. But if the answer to the first question would be yes, then the editors know that I have a thorough review lying around. Just resubmitting this one would save a colleague from writing a new one.
mathematics peer-review
asked Nov 28 at 0:16
Choky
985
I have been serving for several years as a reviewer for both Mathematical Reviews (MathSciNet) and ZbMath.
Earlier this year, I received an invitation for a paper for MR which I already reviewed for ZbMath. I dug up my old review and submitted it to MathSciNet without giving it much thought.
But there seems to be a pattern emerging. I received an invitation from MR for two more papers I already reviewed for ZbMath.
So here are my questions:
- Do the editors of MR know/check who reviewed the paper for ZbMath in order
to find suitable reviewers? - What do I do about the double reviews?
My idea was to just refuse to write the reviews. But if the answer to the first question would be yes, then the editors know that I have a thorough review lying around. Just resubmitting this one would save a colleague from writing a new one.
mathematics peer-review
mathematics peer-review
asked Nov 28 at 0:16
Choky
985
asked Nov 28 at 0:16
Choky
985
asked Nov 28 at 0:16
Choky
985
asked Nov 28 at 0:16
Choky
985
asked Nov 28 at 0:16
Choky
985
985
3
@BryanKrause I think these are different topics: this is about reviews (after publication) and the other one about referee reports.
– Christian
Nov 28 at 6:34
2
Many times I've seen ZbMath reviews (indeed, print versions from 1990s and earlier) that indicated, either at the beginning or at the end (I think it was at the end), that the review was from Math. Reviews, maybe something like "(MR 86c:30018)" (parentheses included; since this is almost certainly a true review number, I'm not claiming what I'm saying is the case for this review). However, I never knew whether such cases are as you describe or whether they just asked to use the MR review because they couldn't obtain a suitable review for some reason. And I've seen the reverse also.
– Dave L Renfro
Nov 28 at 8:38
@DaveLRenfro I wrote one of these (more recently). zbMath assigned me the same item (by chance I think) and they offered that I could submit the same review as to MR (see my answer below for more details)
– Christian
Nov 28 at 8:50
add a comment |
3
@BryanKrause I think these are different topics: this is about reviews (after publication) and the other one about referee reports.
– Christian
Nov 28 at 6:34
2
Many times I've seen ZbMath reviews (indeed, print versions from 1990s and earlier) that indicated, either at the beginning or at the end (I think it was at the end), that the review was from Math. Reviews, maybe something like "(MR 86c:30018)" (parentheses included; since this is almost certainly a true review number, I'm not claiming what I'm saying is the case for this review). However, I never knew whether such cases are as you describe or whether they just asked to use the MR review because they couldn't obtain a suitable review for some reason. And I've seen the reverse also.
– Dave L Renfro
Nov 28 at 8:38
@DaveLRenfro I wrote one of these (more recently). zbMath assigned me the same item (by chance I think) and they offered that I could submit the same review as to MR (see my answer below for more details)
– Christian
Nov 28 at 8:50
3
3
@BryanKrause I think these are different topics: this is about reviews (after publication) and the other one about referee reports.
– Christian
Nov 28 at 6:34
@BryanKrause I think these are different topics: this is about reviews (after publication) and the other one about referee reports.
– Christian
Nov 28 at 6:34
2
2
Many times I've seen ZbMath reviews (indeed, print versions from 1990s and earlier) that indicated, either at the beginning or at the end (I think it was at the end), that the review was from Math. Reviews, maybe something like "(MR 86c:30018)" (parentheses included; since this is almost certainly a true review number, I'm not claiming what I'm saying is the case for this review). However, I never knew whether such cases are as you describe or whether they just asked to use the MR review because they couldn't obtain a suitable review for some reason. And I've seen the reverse also.
– Dave L Renfro
Nov 28 at 8:38
Many times I've seen ZbMath reviews (indeed, print versions from 1990s and earlier) that indicated, either at the beginning or at the end (I think it was at the end), that the review was from Math. Reviews, maybe something like "(MR 86c:30018)" (parentheses included; since this is almost certainly a true review number, I'm not claiming what I'm saying is the case for this review). However, I never knew whether such cases are as you describe or whether they just asked to use the MR review because they couldn't obtain a suitable review for some reason. And I've seen the reverse also.
– Dave L Renfro
Nov 28 at 8:38
@DaveLRenfro I wrote one of these (more recently). zbMath assigned me the same item (by chance I think) and they offered that I could submit the same review as to MR (see my answer below for more details)
– Christian
Nov 28 at 8:50
@DaveLRenfro I wrote one of these (more recently). zbMath assigned me the same item (by chance I think) and they offered that I could submit the same review as to MR (see my answer below for more details)
– Christian
Nov 28 at 8:50
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
up vote
38
down vote
accepted
The Math Reviews Guide for Reviewers addresses this explicitly:
Reviews in other publications. You may find yourself asked to write a review of the same item for another publication. In general, the community is best served by reviews written independently. If you have already been asked by another publication to review an item, please let us know and we will transfer it to another reviewer.
So, if you have already reviewed the article for Zbmath, you should decline to review it for MR. I didn't find a similar rule on the Zbmath side, but I would say the converse should also hold.
Also, per your agreement with Zbmath, when you submit a review to them, you grant them "exclusive exploitation rights". So if you submit the same review to MR, you're infringing Zbmath's copyright. I doubt they will sue you over it, but this shows it's actually illegal as well as unwanted.
In view of this, you may want to contact MR and ask them to withdraw your previously submitted review.
Evidently, one should not assume that the MR editors will check who reviewed the article for Zbmath in order to avoid inviting the same person, since they apparently failed to do so in your case. (Another possibility is that they did check, but your Zbmath review hadn't been posted yet.)
answered Nov 28 at 0:33
Nate Eldredge
103k32294394
1
In my experience zbMath wants to know about when they ask the same person as MR but might not transfer the item and even offer to accept the same review.
– Christian
Nov 28 at 6:37
Great answer! Do you know where one can access the corresponding agreement with Mathscinet, by the way?
– Federico Poloni
Nov 28 at 13:46
1
I think we had another question about it. I don't think it's online; they send it to you directly when you first start to review.
– Nate Eldredge
Nov 28 at 15:30
2
@FedericoPoloni I think Nate is referring to this recent question; the accepted answer (by the Executive Editor of Mathematical Reviews) mentions copyright and what Mathscinet allows you to do (which seems to correspond to Christian's answer), and it also contains an extract of the reviewer letter, apparently.
– Arnaud D.
Nov 29 at 10:48
add a comment |
up vote
12
down vote
I was in a similar situation but in the other order: I reviewed a paper for Mathematical Reviews and then was asked by zbMath to review the same paper. I told zbMath about this and they agreed that it is not ideal but they asked me to write a review nevertheless and told me that they are fine with getting the same review as Mathematical Reviews. I asked MR for permission to do this and was told that they always grant it provided they are the first one to publish it. They asked me to make sure to tell the editors of zbMath that MR published the review first and that they would know how to handle it. It seems that this situation happens from time to time.
Note that this situation is different since Mathematical Reviews‘ terms are more permissive than zbMath‘s.
answered Nov 28 at 6:31
Christian
366212
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
38
down vote
accepted
The Math Reviews Guide for Reviewers addresses this explicitly:
Reviews in other publications. You may find yourself asked to write a review of the same item for another publication. In general, the community is best served by reviews written independently. If you have already been asked by another publication to review an item, please let us know and we will transfer it to another reviewer.
So, if you have already reviewed the article for Zbmath, you should decline to review it for MR. I didn't find a similar rule on the Zbmath side, but I would say the converse should also hold.
Also, per your agreement with Zbmath, when you submit a review to them, you grant them "exclusive exploitation rights". So if you submit the same review to MR, you're infringing Zbmath's copyright. I doubt they will sue you over it, but this shows it's actually illegal as well as unwanted.
In view of this, you may want to contact MR and ask them to withdraw your previously submitted review.
Evidently, one should not assume that the MR editors will check who reviewed the article for Zbmath in order to avoid inviting the same person, since they apparently failed to do so in your case. (Another possibility is that they did check, but your Zbmath review hadn't been posted yet.)
answered Nov 28 at 0:33
Nate Eldredge
103k32294394
1
In my experience zbMath wants to know about when they ask the same person as MR but might not transfer the item and even offer to accept the same review.
– Christian
Nov 28 at 6:37
Great answer! Do you know where one can access the corresponding agreement with Mathscinet, by the way?
– Federico Poloni
Nov 28 at 13:46
1
I think we had another question about it. I don't think it's online; they send it to you directly when you first start to review.
– Nate Eldredge
Nov 28 at 15:30
2
@FedericoPoloni I think Nate is referring to this recent question; the accepted answer (by the Executive Editor of Mathematical Reviews) mentions copyright and what Mathscinet allows you to do (which seems to correspond to Christian's answer), and it also contains an extract of the reviewer letter, apparently.
– Arnaud D.
Nov 29 at 10:48
add a comment |
up vote
38
down vote
accepted
The Math Reviews Guide for Reviewers addresses this explicitly:
Reviews in other publications. You may find yourself asked to write a review of the same item for another publication. In general, the community is best served by reviews written independently. If you have already been asked by another publication to review an item, please let us know and we will transfer it to another reviewer.
So, if you have already reviewed the article for Zbmath, you should decline to review it for MR. I didn't find a similar rule on the Zbmath side, but I would say the converse should also hold.
Also, per your agreement with Zbmath, when you submit a review to them, you grant them "exclusive exploitation rights". So if you submit the same review to MR, you're infringing Zbmath's copyright. I doubt they will sue you over it, but this shows it's actually illegal as well as unwanted.
In view of this, you may want to contact MR and ask them to withdraw your previously submitted review.
Evidently, one should not assume that the MR editors will check who reviewed the article for Zbmath in order to avoid inviting the same person, since they apparently failed to do so in your case. (Another possibility is that they did check, but your Zbmath review hadn't been posted yet.)
answered Nov 28 at 0:33
Nate Eldredge
103k32294394
1
In my experience zbMath wants to know about when they ask the same person as MR but might not transfer the item and even offer to accept the same review.
– Christian
Nov 28 at 6:37
Great answer! Do you know where one can access the corresponding agreement with Mathscinet, by the way?
– Federico Poloni
Nov 28 at 13:46
1
I think we had another question about it. I don't think it's online; they send it to you directly when you first start to review.
– Nate Eldredge
Nov 28 at 15:30
2
@FedericoPoloni I think Nate is referring to this recent question; the accepted answer (by the Executive Editor of Mathematical Reviews) mentions copyright and what Mathscinet allows you to do (which seems to correspond to Christian's answer), and it also contains an extract of the reviewer letter, apparently.
– Arnaud D.
Nov 29 at 10:48
add a comment |
up vote
38
down vote
accepted
up vote
38
down vote
accepted
The Math Reviews Guide for Reviewers addresses this explicitly:
Reviews in other publications. You may find yourself asked to write a review of the same item for another publication. In general, the community is best served by reviews written independently. If you have already been asked by another publication to review an item, please let us know and we will transfer it to another reviewer.
So, if you have already reviewed the article for Zbmath, you should decline to review it for MR. I didn't find a similar rule on the Zbmath side, but I would say the converse should also hold.
Also, per your agreement with Zbmath, when you submit a review to them, you grant them "exclusive exploitation rights". So if you submit the same review to MR, you're infringing Zbmath's copyright. I doubt they will sue you over it, but this shows it's actually illegal as well as unwanted.
In view of this, you may want to contact MR and ask them to withdraw your previously submitted review.
Evidently, one should not assume that the MR editors will check who reviewed the article for Zbmath in order to avoid inviting the same person, since they apparently failed to do so in your case. (Another possibility is that they did check, but your Zbmath review hadn't been posted yet.)
answered Nov 28 at 0:33
Nate Eldredge
103k32294394
The Math Reviews Guide for Reviewers addresses this explicitly:
Reviews in other publications. You may find yourself asked to write a review of the same item for another publication. In general, the community is best served by reviews written independently. If you have already been asked by another publication to review an item, please let us know and we will transfer it to another reviewer.
So, if you have already reviewed the article for Zbmath, you should decline to review it for MR. I didn't find a similar rule on the Zbmath side, but I would say the converse should also hold.
Also, per your agreement with Zbmath, when you submit a review to them, you grant them "exclusive exploitation rights". So if you submit the same review to MR, you're infringing Zbmath's copyright. I doubt they will sue you over it, but this shows it's actually illegal as well as unwanted.
In view of this, you may want to contact MR and ask them to withdraw your previously submitted review.
Evidently, one should not assume that the MR editors will check who reviewed the article for Zbmath in order to avoid inviting the same person, since they apparently failed to do so in your case. (Another possibility is that they did check, but your Zbmath review hadn't been posted yet.)
answered Nov 28 at 0:33
Nate Eldredge
103k32294394
edited Nov 28 at 0:44
answered Nov 28 at 0:33
Nate Eldredge
103k32294394
answered Nov 28 at 0:33
Nate Eldredge
103k32294394
answered Nov 28 at 0:33
Nate Eldredge
103k32294394
103k32294394
1
In my experience zbMath wants to know about when they ask the same person as MR but might not transfer the item and even offer to accept the same review.
– Christian
Nov 28 at 6:37
Great answer! Do you know where one can access the corresponding agreement with Mathscinet, by the way?
– Federico Poloni
Nov 28 at 13:46
1
I think we had another question about it. I don't think it's online; they send it to you directly when you first start to review.
– Nate Eldredge
Nov 28 at 15:30
2
@FedericoPoloni I think Nate is referring to this recent question; the accepted answer (by the Executive Editor of Mathematical Reviews) mentions copyright and what Mathscinet allows you to do (which seems to correspond to Christian's answer), and it also contains an extract of the reviewer letter, apparently.
– Arnaud D.
Nov 29 at 10:48
add a comment |
1
In my experience zbMath wants to know about when they ask the same person as MR but might not transfer the item and even offer to accept the same review.
– Christian
Nov 28 at 6:37
Great answer! Do you know where one can access the corresponding agreement with Mathscinet, by the way?
– Federico Poloni
Nov 28 at 13:46
1
I think we had another question about it. I don't think it's online; they send it to you directly when you first start to review.
– Nate Eldredge
Nov 28 at 15:30
2
@FedericoPoloni I think Nate is referring to this recent question; the accepted answer (by the Executive Editor of Mathematical Reviews) mentions copyright and what Mathscinet allows you to do (which seems to correspond to Christian's answer), and it also contains an extract of the reviewer letter, apparently.
– Arnaud D.
Nov 29 at 10:48
1
1
In my experience zbMath wants to know about when they ask the same person as MR but might not transfer the item and even offer to accept the same review.
– Christian
Nov 28 at 6:37
In my experience zbMath wants to know about when they ask the same person as MR but might not transfer the item and even offer to accept the same review.
– Christian
Nov 28 at 6:37
Great answer! Do you know where one can access the corresponding agreement with Mathscinet, by the way?
– Federico Poloni
Nov 28 at 13:46
Great answer! Do you know where one can access the corresponding agreement with Mathscinet, by the way?
– Federico Poloni
Nov 28 at 13:46
1
1
I think we had another question about it. I don't think it's online; they send it to you directly when you first start to review.
– Nate Eldredge
Nov 28 at 15:30
I think we had another question about it. I don't think it's online; they send it to you directly when you first start to review.
– Nate Eldredge
Nov 28 at 15:30
2
2
@FedericoPoloni I think Nate is referring to this recent question; the accepted answer (by the Executive Editor of Mathematical Reviews) mentions copyright and what Mathscinet allows you to do (which seems to correspond to Christian's answer), and it also contains an extract of the reviewer letter, apparently.
– Arnaud D.
Nov 29 at 10:48
@FedericoPoloni I think Nate is referring to this recent question; the accepted answer (by the Executive Editor of Mathematical Reviews) mentions copyright and what Mathscinet allows you to do (which seems to correspond to Christian's answer), and it also contains an extract of the reviewer letter, apparently.
– Arnaud D.
Nov 29 at 10:48
add a comment |
up vote
12
down vote
I was in a similar situation but in the other order: I reviewed a paper for Mathematical Reviews and then was asked by zbMath to review the same paper. I told zbMath about this and they agreed that it is not ideal but they asked me to write a review nevertheless and told me that they are fine with getting the same review as Mathematical Reviews. I asked MR for permission to do this and was told that they always grant it provided they are the first one to publish it. They asked me to make sure to tell the editors of zbMath that MR published the review first and that they would know how to handle it. It seems that this situation happens from time to time.
Note that this situation is different since Mathematical Reviews‘ terms are more permissive than zbMath‘s.
answered Nov 28 at 6:31
Christian
366212
add a comment |
up vote
12
down vote
I was in a similar situation but in the other order: I reviewed a paper for Mathematical Reviews and then was asked by zbMath to review the same paper. I told zbMath about this and they agreed that it is not ideal but they asked me to write a review nevertheless and told me that they are fine with getting the same review as Mathematical Reviews. I asked MR for permission to do this and was told that they always grant it provided they are the first one to publish it. They asked me to make sure to tell the editors of zbMath that MR published the review first and that they would know how to handle it. It seems that this situation happens from time to time.
Note that this situation is different since Mathematical Reviews‘ terms are more permissive than zbMath‘s.
answered Nov 28 at 6:31
Christian
366212
add a comment |
up vote
12
down vote
up vote
12
down vote
I was in a similar situation but in the other order: I reviewed a paper for Mathematical Reviews and then was asked by zbMath to review the same paper. I told zbMath about this and they agreed that it is not ideal but they asked me to write a review nevertheless and told me that they are fine with getting the same review as Mathematical Reviews. I asked MR for permission to do this and was told that they always grant it provided they are the first one to publish it. They asked me to make sure to tell the editors of zbMath that MR published the review first and that they would know how to handle it. It seems that this situation happens from time to time.
Note that this situation is different since Mathematical Reviews‘ terms are more permissive than zbMath‘s.
answered Nov 28 at 6:31
Christian
366212
I was in a similar situation but in the other order: I reviewed a paper for Mathematical Reviews and then was asked by zbMath to review the same paper. I told zbMath about this and they agreed that it is not ideal but they asked me to write a review nevertheless and told me that they are fine with getting the same review as Mathematical Reviews. I asked MR for permission to do this and was told that they always grant it provided they are the first one to publish it. They asked me to make sure to tell the editors of zbMath that MR published the review first and that they would know how to handle it. It seems that this situation happens from time to time.
Note that this situation is different since Mathematical Reviews‘ terms are more permissive than zbMath‘s.
answered Nov 28 at 6:31
Christian
366212
edited Nov 28 at 6:45
answered Nov 28 at 6:31
Christian
366212
answered Nov 28 at 6:31
Christian
366212
answered Nov 28 at 6:31
Christian
366212
366212
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Academia Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.
Please pay close attention to the following guidance:
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2facademia.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f120719%2fsame-review-for-math-reviews-and-zentralblatt%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
3
@BryanKrause I think these are different topics: this is about reviews (after publication) and the other one about referee reports.
– Christian
Nov 28 at 6:34
2
Many times I've seen ZbMath reviews (indeed, print versions from 1990s and earlier) that indicated, either at the beginning or at the end (I think it was at the end), that the review was from Math. Reviews, maybe something like "(MR 86c:30018)" (parentheses included; since this is almost certainly a true review number, I'm not claiming what I'm saying is the case for this review). However, I never knew whether such cases are as you describe or whether they just asked to use the MR review because they couldn't obtain a suitable review for some reason. And I've seen the reverse also.
– Dave L Renfro
Nov 28 at 8:38
@DaveLRenfro I wrote one of these (more recently). zbMath assigned me the same item (by chance I think) and they offered that I could submit the same review as to MR (see my answer below for more details)
– Christian
Nov 28 at 8:50