shouldiuse.io

VERDICT

Should I use arXiv?

Open-access preprint repository for physics, math, computer science and more - arxiv.org

Worth it. Free, standard infrastructure for physics, math, and CS researchers to publish and read preprints. Humanities scholars or anyone shopping for peer review or commercial software has no business here.

Confidence

High. Based on 20+ public sources. arXiv is a free nonprofit repository, not commercial software — there is nothing to buy and no vendor to evaluate.

Ratings

  • Value for money
  • Ease of use
  • Feature depth
  • Support qualityInsufficient evidence
  • Security posture

Pricing

$0

Free

ModelNot disclosed
Monthly feesNot disclosed
HardwareNot disclosed
Free tierYes

Best for

  • Physics, math, CS researchers
  • Preprint-first authors
  • Literature monitoring via API
  • Open-access institutional mandates

Not for

  • Non-STEM researchers — minimal humanities and social science coverage
  • Anyone wanting peer review; material is explicitly not peer-reviewed
  • First-time submitters without an endorser in their category
  • Software buyers — it is free public infrastructure, nothing to purchase

Gotchas - check before you buy

high

LaTeX source is public — studies found researchers leaking secrets and tokens in it

medium

Endorsement needed for first submission in many categories; finding an endorser drags on

medium

Hosted papers are prompt-injection vectors if fed to AI agents

medium

Endorsement and moderation are volunteer-run; support is slow for edge cases

Pros and cons

Pros

  • Free for readers and authors, always
  • De facto preprint standard in physics, math, and CS
  • Open API enables programmatic search and harvesting
  • Now an independent nonprofit, outside Cornell's control
  • Actively banning AI-generated paper spam with one-year bans

Cons

  • No peer review — quality varies widely
  • First-time submitters need endorsement from existing authors
  • CS category stopped accepting literature reviews and surveys
  • Submissions can sit 'on hold' in moderation indefinitely
  • AI-written papers trigger a one-year author ban

Sources & method

Analyzed 9/26/2026 - 12 sources - No known breaches of arXiv itself; documented risks are author-side — secrets leaked in LaTeX source and prompt injection embedded in hosted papers.

official x4review x2security x2news x4
  • Secrets exposed in arXiv LaTeX source, Studies found cybersecurity researchers (and others) publishing LaTeX source containing leaked credentials and sensitive data.
  • Prompt injection in hosted papers, Research papers on arXiv have been shown to carry prompt-injection content that can manipulate AI tools reading them.

Key stats

  • Value for money: 5/5

    Rating

  • $0

    Starting price

  • 12

    Sources

  • Analyzed

  • Value for money: 5/5. Free forever, funded by members and donations
  • Ease of use: 3/5. Endorsement requirement and moderation holds slow first submissions
  • Feature depth: 4/5. Decades-deep archive, broad categories, open API
  • Support quality. Insufficient evidence
  • Security posture: 4/5. No known breaches; author-side leaks are the risk
  • Free Price Always free for readers and authors
  • 1991 Founded Started at Los Alamos
  • Independent nonprofit Governance Separated from Cornell in 2026
  • $10M Upgrade funding Grant received in 2023

Pricing

Free

$0

  • Unlimited reading and PDF downloads
  • Submission with endorsement and moderation
  • Open API access

Security

No known breaches of arXiv itself; documented risks are author-side — secrets leaked in LaTeX source and prompt injection embedded in hosted papers.

  • Secrets exposed in arXiv LaTeX sourceStudies found cybersecurity researchers (and others) publishing LaTeX source containing leaked credentials and sensitive data.11
  • Prompt injection in hosted papersResearch papers on arXiv have been shown to carry prompt-injection content that can manipulate AI tools reading them.12

What users say

Researchers treat arXiv as indispensable infrastructure, while griping about moderation holds, endorsement hurdles, and uneven paper quality.

“The arXiv is great, and”
Reddit, r/MachineLearning
“Arxiv is a archive and n”
Reddit, r/MachineLearning
“Just use ArXiV.”
X (Twitter)

Alternatives

Compare arXiv with each alternative.

Full analysis

Based on 20+ public sources. arXiv is a free nonprofit repository, not commercial software — there is nothing to buy and no vendor to evaluate.

Free, standard preprint archive for physics/math/CS; no peer review, endorsement needed to submit, mind the AI rules.

Methodology

Based on 20+ public sources. arXiv is a free nonprofit repository, not commercial software — there is nothing to buy and no vendor to evaluate.

Sources

  1. About arXivinfo.arxiv.org
    official
  2. arXiv Membership — always freeinfo.arxiv.org
    official
  3. arXiv API Basicsinfo.arxiv.org
    official
  4. arXiv — Wikipediaen.wikipedia.org
    official
  5. arXiv declares independence from Cornellscience.org
    news
  6. arXiv receives $10M for upgradesnews.cornell.edu
    news
  7. arXiv bans AI-written papers for a yeartechcrunch.com
    news
  8. arXiv bans CS review articlesnature.com
    news
  9. First-time submitter endorsement threadreddit.com
    review
  10. Is arXiv always good? discussionreddit.com
    review
  11. arXiv LaTeX source secret leakshelpnetsecurity.com
    security
  12. Prompt injection in arXiv paperspangea.cloud
    security

Rate this review

Anonymous. You can change your vote.

Loading votes…

Comments

One queue. No nested comments. Give a display name first. Limit: 200 words per comment and 7 comments per day. You can edit or delete yours.

Save a name to write a comment.

0 / 200 words

No comments yet.