All the citations in the references are being numbered as '0' in ArXiv while uploading from Overleaf
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
I compiled the latex source code from overleafv2 using the submit for arXiv tab and I am using this downloaded zip file for my submission. The pdf preview of the submission shows all of the references with the same count of '0'. I am using biblatex package for references. Not sure where the problem exists so any suggestions are welcomed.
EDIT 1:
Output of ArXiv:
The submission processed ok. Please find the link for the arXiv output.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/12uoDIo0JePOjZ_5Ul3huuRwt8QZ3Ix7FPhkJCFERdY0/edit?usp=sharing
Output of Overleaf:
There are a lot of Overfull
and Underfull
warnings and a couple of others. From what I see, it doesn't have any issues related to the bibliography. Please find the link for the overleaf output.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1yKgqkmkQmdeb_S8CFJLrAAKvxIerFPJZLdJ_PD3YqI0/edit?usp=sharing
biblatex overleaf arxiv
|
show 3 more comments
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
I compiled the latex source code from overleafv2 using the submit for arXiv tab and I am using this downloaded zip file for my submission. The pdf preview of the submission shows all of the references with the same count of '0'. I am using biblatex package for references. Not sure where the problem exists so any suggestions are welcomed.
EDIT 1:
Output of ArXiv:
The submission processed ok. Please find the link for the arXiv output.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/12uoDIo0JePOjZ_5Ul3huuRwt8QZ3Ix7FPhkJCFERdY0/edit?usp=sharing
Output of Overleaf:
There are a lot of Overfull
and Underfull
warnings and a couple of others. From what I see, it doesn't have any issues related to the bibliography. Please find the link for the overleaf output.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1yKgqkmkQmdeb_S8CFJLrAAKvxIerFPJZLdJ_PD3YqI0/edit?usp=sharing
biblatex overleaf arxiv
Could you show us your code and its output so that we could work on that?
– zyy
Dec 6 at 19:19
Related: tex.stackexchange.com/q/429436/35864. We will need to know a little more about your situation: Do you get any errors or warnings on your compilation on Overleaf? Does the arXiv report any errors or warnings? Can you show us a minimal example of what you are doing?
– moewe
Dec 6 at 20:35
@moewe Yes, I am using biblatex. I generated a .bbl file from overleaf and uploaded that zip file on arXiv.
– saha rudra
Dec 8 at 7:34
@moewe I have added the compilations outputs from arXiv and overleaf.
– saha rudra
Dec 8 at 7:55
Unfortunately, the arXiv log is not as verbose as I hoped. All I can see is that a.bbl
file calledegpaper_final.bbl
is read. TeX reports no error when that file is read, so it stands to reason that the.bbl
format is OK. It is a bit odd thatbiblatex
then complains about missing references (e.g.clevr1
) and only stops complaining on the second run. In a test document on my machine, LaTeX would not complain on the first run and everything would be fine by the second run. Do you by chance use the optiondefernumbers
?
– moewe
Dec 8 at 12:38
|
show 3 more comments
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
I compiled the latex source code from overleafv2 using the submit for arXiv tab and I am using this downloaded zip file for my submission. The pdf preview of the submission shows all of the references with the same count of '0'. I am using biblatex package for references. Not sure where the problem exists so any suggestions are welcomed.
EDIT 1:
Output of ArXiv:
The submission processed ok. Please find the link for the arXiv output.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/12uoDIo0JePOjZ_5Ul3huuRwt8QZ3Ix7FPhkJCFERdY0/edit?usp=sharing
Output of Overleaf:
There are a lot of Overfull
and Underfull
warnings and a couple of others. From what I see, it doesn't have any issues related to the bibliography. Please find the link for the overleaf output.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1yKgqkmkQmdeb_S8CFJLrAAKvxIerFPJZLdJ_PD3YqI0/edit?usp=sharing
biblatex overleaf arxiv
I compiled the latex source code from overleafv2 using the submit for arXiv tab and I am using this downloaded zip file for my submission. The pdf preview of the submission shows all of the references with the same count of '0'. I am using biblatex package for references. Not sure where the problem exists so any suggestions are welcomed.
EDIT 1:
Output of ArXiv:
The submission processed ok. Please find the link for the arXiv output.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/12uoDIo0JePOjZ_5Ul3huuRwt8QZ3Ix7FPhkJCFERdY0/edit?usp=sharing
Output of Overleaf:
There are a lot of Overfull
and Underfull
warnings and a couple of others. From what I see, it doesn't have any issues related to the bibliography. Please find the link for the overleaf output.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1yKgqkmkQmdeb_S8CFJLrAAKvxIerFPJZLdJ_PD3YqI0/edit?usp=sharing
biblatex overleaf arxiv
biblatex overleaf arxiv
edited Dec 8 at 7:50
asked Dec 6 at 17:46
saha rudra
1084
1084
Could you show us your code and its output so that we could work on that?
– zyy
Dec 6 at 19:19
Related: tex.stackexchange.com/q/429436/35864. We will need to know a little more about your situation: Do you get any errors or warnings on your compilation on Overleaf? Does the arXiv report any errors or warnings? Can you show us a minimal example of what you are doing?
– moewe
Dec 6 at 20:35
@moewe Yes, I am using biblatex. I generated a .bbl file from overleaf and uploaded that zip file on arXiv.
– saha rudra
Dec 8 at 7:34
@moewe I have added the compilations outputs from arXiv and overleaf.
– saha rudra
Dec 8 at 7:55
Unfortunately, the arXiv log is not as verbose as I hoped. All I can see is that a.bbl
file calledegpaper_final.bbl
is read. TeX reports no error when that file is read, so it stands to reason that the.bbl
format is OK. It is a bit odd thatbiblatex
then complains about missing references (e.g.clevr1
) and only stops complaining on the second run. In a test document on my machine, LaTeX would not complain on the first run and everything would be fine by the second run. Do you by chance use the optiondefernumbers
?
– moewe
Dec 8 at 12:38
|
show 3 more comments
Could you show us your code and its output so that we could work on that?
– zyy
Dec 6 at 19:19
Related: tex.stackexchange.com/q/429436/35864. We will need to know a little more about your situation: Do you get any errors or warnings on your compilation on Overleaf? Does the arXiv report any errors or warnings? Can you show us a minimal example of what you are doing?
– moewe
Dec 6 at 20:35
@moewe Yes, I am using biblatex. I generated a .bbl file from overleaf and uploaded that zip file on arXiv.
– saha rudra
Dec 8 at 7:34
@moewe I have added the compilations outputs from arXiv and overleaf.
– saha rudra
Dec 8 at 7:55
Unfortunately, the arXiv log is not as verbose as I hoped. All I can see is that a.bbl
file calledegpaper_final.bbl
is read. TeX reports no error when that file is read, so it stands to reason that the.bbl
format is OK. It is a bit odd thatbiblatex
then complains about missing references (e.g.clevr1
) and only stops complaining on the second run. In a test document on my machine, LaTeX would not complain on the first run and everything would be fine by the second run. Do you by chance use the optiondefernumbers
?
– moewe
Dec 8 at 12:38
Could you show us your code and its output so that we could work on that?
– zyy
Dec 6 at 19:19
Could you show us your code and its output so that we could work on that?
– zyy
Dec 6 at 19:19
Related: tex.stackexchange.com/q/429436/35864. We will need to know a little more about your situation: Do you get any errors or warnings on your compilation on Overleaf? Does the arXiv report any errors or warnings? Can you show us a minimal example of what you are doing?
– moewe
Dec 6 at 20:35
Related: tex.stackexchange.com/q/429436/35864. We will need to know a little more about your situation: Do you get any errors or warnings on your compilation on Overleaf? Does the arXiv report any errors or warnings? Can you show us a minimal example of what you are doing?
– moewe
Dec 6 at 20:35
@moewe Yes, I am using biblatex. I generated a .bbl file from overleaf and uploaded that zip file on arXiv.
– saha rudra
Dec 8 at 7:34
@moewe Yes, I am using biblatex. I generated a .bbl file from overleaf and uploaded that zip file on arXiv.
– saha rudra
Dec 8 at 7:34
@moewe I have added the compilations outputs from arXiv and overleaf.
– saha rudra
Dec 8 at 7:55
@moewe I have added the compilations outputs from arXiv and overleaf.
– saha rudra
Dec 8 at 7:55
Unfortunately, the arXiv log is not as verbose as I hoped. All I can see is that a
.bbl
file called egpaper_final.bbl
is read. TeX reports no error when that file is read, so it stands to reason that the .bbl
format is OK. It is a bit odd that biblatex
then complains about missing references (e.g. clevr1
) and only stops complaining on the second run. In a test document on my machine, LaTeX would not complain on the first run and everything would be fine by the second run. Do you by chance use the option defernumbers
?– moewe
Dec 8 at 12:38
Unfortunately, the arXiv log is not as verbose as I hoped. All I can see is that a
.bbl
file called egpaper_final.bbl
is read. TeX reports no error when that file is read, so it stands to reason that the .bbl
format is OK. It is a bit odd that biblatex
then complains about missing references (e.g. clevr1
) and only stops complaining on the second run. In a test document on my machine, LaTeX would not complain on the first run and everything would be fine by the second run. Do you by chance use the option defernumbers
?– moewe
Dec 8 at 12:38
|
show 3 more comments
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
up vote
0
down vote
accepted
As confirmed in the comments your project uses defernumbers
. With that option the label number for an entry is not assigned at the beginning of the document when the entry data is read from the .bbl
file, instead the label number is assigned only once the entry is printed in the bibliography. Consider the following example with and without defernumbers
documentclass[british]{article}
usepackage[T1]{fontenc}
usepackage[utf8]{inputenc}
usepackage{babel}
usepackage{csquotes}
usepackage[style=numeric, defernumbers, backend=biber]{biblatex}
addbibresource{biblatex-examples.bib}
begin{document}
cite{sigfridsson,moraux,worman,nussbaum,geer,cicero}
printbibliography[keyword=secondary]
printbibliography[notkeyword=secondary]
end{document}
For defernumbers
to work properly the compilation cycle must include
- LaTeX (in the resulting PDF all cite keys are bold)
- Biber
- LaTeX (in the resulting PDF all citations are 0)
- LaTeX (in the resulting PDF all citations show up)
If an appropriate .bbl
is already present (i.e. if you compile the example from above as just described and then delete all files except the .tex
and .bbl
file) the compilation cycle still (perhaps unexpectedly) needs to include three LaTeX runs
- LaTeX (in the resulting PDF all citations are 0)
- LaTeX (in the resulting PDF all citations are 0)
- LaTeX (in the resulting PDF all citations show up)
That is because biblatex
's heuristic to determine whether a Biber run is required will request a Biber run in the first LaTeX compilation. If a Biber run is requested, a few auxiliary bits are not written out to the .aux
file in the anticipation that a subsequent requested Biber run could potentially change the relevant information anyway. This means that relevant data is only written to the .aux
file on the second LaTeX run, when biblatex
has given up asking for a new Biber run.
The log files of your arXiv submission show that the arXiv only runs LaTeX twice, hence you get only 0s instead of the proper citation labels.
The relevant information for defernumbers
lives in the .aux
file. It might be possible to upload the .aux
file to the arXiv as well (I'm not sure if they accept that or will automatically reject .aux
uploads; uploaded .aux
files might cause version or other package incompatibilities) in which case you would obtain the desired result after only one LaTeX run. This solution is more of a last resort.
A different and better solution would be to tell LaTeX not to ask for a Biber run at all when you upload a file to the arXiv. Just add
makeatletter
letblx@rerun@biberrelax
makeatother
to your preamble. Since the arXiv won't run Biber for you anyway, there is no point in having biblatex
request a Biber run. In this instance we bypass a few tests that would block information subject to change after a Biber run from being written to the .aux
file. In the end then two LaTeX runs should be enough for your citations to show up properly.
I used the solution proposed at the end which worked for me.
– saha rudra
2 days ago
@saharudra Glad it worked!
– moewe
2 days ago
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "85"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
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%2ftex.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f463556%2fall-the-citations-in-the-references-are-being-numbered-as-0-in-arxiv-while-upl%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
0
down vote
accepted
As confirmed in the comments your project uses defernumbers
. With that option the label number for an entry is not assigned at the beginning of the document when the entry data is read from the .bbl
file, instead the label number is assigned only once the entry is printed in the bibliography. Consider the following example with and without defernumbers
documentclass[british]{article}
usepackage[T1]{fontenc}
usepackage[utf8]{inputenc}
usepackage{babel}
usepackage{csquotes}
usepackage[style=numeric, defernumbers, backend=biber]{biblatex}
addbibresource{biblatex-examples.bib}
begin{document}
cite{sigfridsson,moraux,worman,nussbaum,geer,cicero}
printbibliography[keyword=secondary]
printbibliography[notkeyword=secondary]
end{document}
For defernumbers
to work properly the compilation cycle must include
- LaTeX (in the resulting PDF all cite keys are bold)
- Biber
- LaTeX (in the resulting PDF all citations are 0)
- LaTeX (in the resulting PDF all citations show up)
If an appropriate .bbl
is already present (i.e. if you compile the example from above as just described and then delete all files except the .tex
and .bbl
file) the compilation cycle still (perhaps unexpectedly) needs to include three LaTeX runs
- LaTeX (in the resulting PDF all citations are 0)
- LaTeX (in the resulting PDF all citations are 0)
- LaTeX (in the resulting PDF all citations show up)
That is because biblatex
's heuristic to determine whether a Biber run is required will request a Biber run in the first LaTeX compilation. If a Biber run is requested, a few auxiliary bits are not written out to the .aux
file in the anticipation that a subsequent requested Biber run could potentially change the relevant information anyway. This means that relevant data is only written to the .aux
file on the second LaTeX run, when biblatex
has given up asking for a new Biber run.
The log files of your arXiv submission show that the arXiv only runs LaTeX twice, hence you get only 0s instead of the proper citation labels.
The relevant information for defernumbers
lives in the .aux
file. It might be possible to upload the .aux
file to the arXiv as well (I'm not sure if they accept that or will automatically reject .aux
uploads; uploaded .aux
files might cause version or other package incompatibilities) in which case you would obtain the desired result after only one LaTeX run. This solution is more of a last resort.
A different and better solution would be to tell LaTeX not to ask for a Biber run at all when you upload a file to the arXiv. Just add
makeatletter
letblx@rerun@biberrelax
makeatother
to your preamble. Since the arXiv won't run Biber for you anyway, there is no point in having biblatex
request a Biber run. In this instance we bypass a few tests that would block information subject to change after a Biber run from being written to the .aux
file. In the end then two LaTeX runs should be enough for your citations to show up properly.
I used the solution proposed at the end which worked for me.
– saha rudra
2 days ago
@saharudra Glad it worked!
– moewe
2 days ago
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
accepted
As confirmed in the comments your project uses defernumbers
. With that option the label number for an entry is not assigned at the beginning of the document when the entry data is read from the .bbl
file, instead the label number is assigned only once the entry is printed in the bibliography. Consider the following example with and without defernumbers
documentclass[british]{article}
usepackage[T1]{fontenc}
usepackage[utf8]{inputenc}
usepackage{babel}
usepackage{csquotes}
usepackage[style=numeric, defernumbers, backend=biber]{biblatex}
addbibresource{biblatex-examples.bib}
begin{document}
cite{sigfridsson,moraux,worman,nussbaum,geer,cicero}
printbibliography[keyword=secondary]
printbibliography[notkeyword=secondary]
end{document}
For defernumbers
to work properly the compilation cycle must include
- LaTeX (in the resulting PDF all cite keys are bold)
- Biber
- LaTeX (in the resulting PDF all citations are 0)
- LaTeX (in the resulting PDF all citations show up)
If an appropriate .bbl
is already present (i.e. if you compile the example from above as just described and then delete all files except the .tex
and .bbl
file) the compilation cycle still (perhaps unexpectedly) needs to include three LaTeX runs
- LaTeX (in the resulting PDF all citations are 0)
- LaTeX (in the resulting PDF all citations are 0)
- LaTeX (in the resulting PDF all citations show up)
That is because biblatex
's heuristic to determine whether a Biber run is required will request a Biber run in the first LaTeX compilation. If a Biber run is requested, a few auxiliary bits are not written out to the .aux
file in the anticipation that a subsequent requested Biber run could potentially change the relevant information anyway. This means that relevant data is only written to the .aux
file on the second LaTeX run, when biblatex
has given up asking for a new Biber run.
The log files of your arXiv submission show that the arXiv only runs LaTeX twice, hence you get only 0s instead of the proper citation labels.
The relevant information for defernumbers
lives in the .aux
file. It might be possible to upload the .aux
file to the arXiv as well (I'm not sure if they accept that or will automatically reject .aux
uploads; uploaded .aux
files might cause version or other package incompatibilities) in which case you would obtain the desired result after only one LaTeX run. This solution is more of a last resort.
A different and better solution would be to tell LaTeX not to ask for a Biber run at all when you upload a file to the arXiv. Just add
makeatletter
letblx@rerun@biberrelax
makeatother
to your preamble. Since the arXiv won't run Biber for you anyway, there is no point in having biblatex
request a Biber run. In this instance we bypass a few tests that would block information subject to change after a Biber run from being written to the .aux
file. In the end then two LaTeX runs should be enough for your citations to show up properly.
I used the solution proposed at the end which worked for me.
– saha rudra
2 days ago
@saharudra Glad it worked!
– moewe
2 days ago
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
accepted
up vote
0
down vote
accepted
As confirmed in the comments your project uses defernumbers
. With that option the label number for an entry is not assigned at the beginning of the document when the entry data is read from the .bbl
file, instead the label number is assigned only once the entry is printed in the bibliography. Consider the following example with and without defernumbers
documentclass[british]{article}
usepackage[T1]{fontenc}
usepackage[utf8]{inputenc}
usepackage{babel}
usepackage{csquotes}
usepackage[style=numeric, defernumbers, backend=biber]{biblatex}
addbibresource{biblatex-examples.bib}
begin{document}
cite{sigfridsson,moraux,worman,nussbaum,geer,cicero}
printbibliography[keyword=secondary]
printbibliography[notkeyword=secondary]
end{document}
For defernumbers
to work properly the compilation cycle must include
- LaTeX (in the resulting PDF all cite keys are bold)
- Biber
- LaTeX (in the resulting PDF all citations are 0)
- LaTeX (in the resulting PDF all citations show up)
If an appropriate .bbl
is already present (i.e. if you compile the example from above as just described and then delete all files except the .tex
and .bbl
file) the compilation cycle still (perhaps unexpectedly) needs to include three LaTeX runs
- LaTeX (in the resulting PDF all citations are 0)
- LaTeX (in the resulting PDF all citations are 0)
- LaTeX (in the resulting PDF all citations show up)
That is because biblatex
's heuristic to determine whether a Biber run is required will request a Biber run in the first LaTeX compilation. If a Biber run is requested, a few auxiliary bits are not written out to the .aux
file in the anticipation that a subsequent requested Biber run could potentially change the relevant information anyway. This means that relevant data is only written to the .aux
file on the second LaTeX run, when biblatex
has given up asking for a new Biber run.
The log files of your arXiv submission show that the arXiv only runs LaTeX twice, hence you get only 0s instead of the proper citation labels.
The relevant information for defernumbers
lives in the .aux
file. It might be possible to upload the .aux
file to the arXiv as well (I'm not sure if they accept that or will automatically reject .aux
uploads; uploaded .aux
files might cause version or other package incompatibilities) in which case you would obtain the desired result after only one LaTeX run. This solution is more of a last resort.
A different and better solution would be to tell LaTeX not to ask for a Biber run at all when you upload a file to the arXiv. Just add
makeatletter
letblx@rerun@biberrelax
makeatother
to your preamble. Since the arXiv won't run Biber for you anyway, there is no point in having biblatex
request a Biber run. In this instance we bypass a few tests that would block information subject to change after a Biber run from being written to the .aux
file. In the end then two LaTeX runs should be enough for your citations to show up properly.
As confirmed in the comments your project uses defernumbers
. With that option the label number for an entry is not assigned at the beginning of the document when the entry data is read from the .bbl
file, instead the label number is assigned only once the entry is printed in the bibliography. Consider the following example with and without defernumbers
documentclass[british]{article}
usepackage[T1]{fontenc}
usepackage[utf8]{inputenc}
usepackage{babel}
usepackage{csquotes}
usepackage[style=numeric, defernumbers, backend=biber]{biblatex}
addbibresource{biblatex-examples.bib}
begin{document}
cite{sigfridsson,moraux,worman,nussbaum,geer,cicero}
printbibliography[keyword=secondary]
printbibliography[notkeyword=secondary]
end{document}
For defernumbers
to work properly the compilation cycle must include
- LaTeX (in the resulting PDF all cite keys are bold)
- Biber
- LaTeX (in the resulting PDF all citations are 0)
- LaTeX (in the resulting PDF all citations show up)
If an appropriate .bbl
is already present (i.e. if you compile the example from above as just described and then delete all files except the .tex
and .bbl
file) the compilation cycle still (perhaps unexpectedly) needs to include three LaTeX runs
- LaTeX (in the resulting PDF all citations are 0)
- LaTeX (in the resulting PDF all citations are 0)
- LaTeX (in the resulting PDF all citations show up)
That is because biblatex
's heuristic to determine whether a Biber run is required will request a Biber run in the first LaTeX compilation. If a Biber run is requested, a few auxiliary bits are not written out to the .aux
file in the anticipation that a subsequent requested Biber run could potentially change the relevant information anyway. This means that relevant data is only written to the .aux
file on the second LaTeX run, when biblatex
has given up asking for a new Biber run.
The log files of your arXiv submission show that the arXiv only runs LaTeX twice, hence you get only 0s instead of the proper citation labels.
The relevant information for defernumbers
lives in the .aux
file. It might be possible to upload the .aux
file to the arXiv as well (I'm not sure if they accept that or will automatically reject .aux
uploads; uploaded .aux
files might cause version or other package incompatibilities) in which case you would obtain the desired result after only one LaTeX run. This solution is more of a last resort.
A different and better solution would be to tell LaTeX not to ask for a Biber run at all when you upload a file to the arXiv. Just add
makeatletter
letblx@rerun@biberrelax
makeatother
to your preamble. Since the arXiv won't run Biber for you anyway, there is no point in having biblatex
request a Biber run. In this instance we bypass a few tests that would block information subject to change after a Biber run from being written to the .aux
file. In the end then two LaTeX runs should be enough for your citations to show up properly.
answered Dec 10 at 11:20
moewe
84.8k9108327
84.8k9108327
I used the solution proposed at the end which worked for me.
– saha rudra
2 days ago
@saharudra Glad it worked!
– moewe
2 days ago
add a comment |
I used the solution proposed at the end which worked for me.
– saha rudra
2 days ago
@saharudra Glad it worked!
– moewe
2 days ago
I used the solution proposed at the end which worked for me.
– saha rudra
2 days ago
I used the solution proposed at the end which worked for me.
– saha rudra
2 days ago
@saharudra Glad it worked!
– moewe
2 days ago
@saharudra Glad it worked!
– moewe
2 days ago
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to TeX - LaTeX 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%2ftex.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f463556%2fall-the-citations-in-the-references-are-being-numbered-as-0-in-arxiv-while-upl%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
Could you show us your code and its output so that we could work on that?
– zyy
Dec 6 at 19:19
Related: tex.stackexchange.com/q/429436/35864. We will need to know a little more about your situation: Do you get any errors or warnings on your compilation on Overleaf? Does the arXiv report any errors or warnings? Can you show us a minimal example of what you are doing?
– moewe
Dec 6 at 20:35
@moewe Yes, I am using biblatex. I generated a .bbl file from overleaf and uploaded that zip file on arXiv.
– saha rudra
Dec 8 at 7:34
@moewe I have added the compilations outputs from arXiv and overleaf.
– saha rudra
Dec 8 at 7:55
Unfortunately, the arXiv log is not as verbose as I hoped. All I can see is that a
.bbl
file calledegpaper_final.bbl
is read. TeX reports no error when that file is read, so it stands to reason that the.bbl
format is OK. It is a bit odd thatbiblatex
then complains about missing references (e.g.clevr1
) and only stops complaining on the second run. In a test document on my machine, LaTeX would not complain on the first run and everything would be fine by the second run. Do you by chance use the optiondefernumbers
?– moewe
Dec 8 at 12:38