According to a report from the “Nature” website on September 20, local time, under the pressure of scientists, Australia’s main research funding agency withdrew a ban: as long as the preprint is cited in the research application, the funding cannot be obtained. Researchers condemned that the ban has fallen short of the times.
Previously, more than 30 research funding applications were rejected by the Australian Research Council (ARC), an internationally renowned scientific research organization and funding agency, because the researchers were Preprinted papers and other materials that have not been peer reviewed are cited in the fund application. These 30-odd studies have applied for more than US$16 million in funding.
The Australian Research Council issued a statement stating that the adjustment of the ARC policy reflects current research trends and the acceptance and use of preprints across multiple research disciplines to accelerate research and promotion The meaning of open mechanisms.
In an interview with “Nature”, some researchers welcomed the adjustment of the ARC policy, but believed that ARC was not doing enough: it should be withdrawn because of the quotation. Rejected research funding application for preprints.
The preprinted paper is an academic draft that has not been peer-reviewed. At present, the most mainstream preprint websites in the world include arXiv in the field of physics, bioRxiv and medRxiv in the field of biomedicine, etc. After the outbreak of Covid-19, due to the rapid demand for academic information, the preprint site appeared at the center of the academic stage and became an important channel for academic exchanges and scientific communication.
A study showed that in the first 10 months of Covid-19, about 125,000 related papers were published worldwide, of which more than 30,000 (about 1/4) is a preprint.