To mark the 20th anniversary of the (14 Aug 1991) commencement of hep-th@xxx.lanl.gov (now arXiv.org), I've adapted this article from one that first appeared in Physics World (2008), was later reprinted (with permission) in Learned Publishing (2009), but never appeared in arXiv. I trace some historical context and early development of the resource, its later trajectory, and close with some thoughts about the future. This version is closer to my original draft, with some updates for this occasion, plus an astounding $2^5$ added footnotes.

We continue investigation of the effect of position in announcements of newly received articles, a single day artifact, with citations received over the course of ensuing years. Earlier work [arXiv:0907.4740, arXiv:0805.0307] focused on the "visibility" effect for positions near the beginnings of announcements, and on the "self-promotion" effect associated to authors intentionally aiming for these positions, with both found correlated to a later enhanced citation rate. Here we consider a "reverse-visibility" effect for positions near the ends of announcements, and on a "procrastination" effect associated to submissions made within the 20 minute period just before the daily deadline. For two large subcommunities of theoretical high energy physics, we find a clear "reverse-visibility" effect, in which articles near the ends of the lists receive a boost in both short-term readership and long-term citations, almost comparable in size to the "visibility" effect documented earlier. For one of those subcommunities, we find an additional "procrastination" effect, in which last position articles submitted shortly before the deadline have an even higher citation rate than those that land more accidentally in that position. We consider and eliminate geographic effects as responsible for the above, and speculate on other possible causes, including "oblivious" and "nightowl" effects.

arXiv.org mediates contact with the literature for entire scholarly communities, both through provision of archival access and through daily email and web announcements of new materials, potentially many screenlengths long. We confirm and extend a surprising correlation between article position in these initial announcements, ordered by submission time, and later citation impact, due primarily to intentional "self-promotion" on the part of authors. A pure "visibility" effect was also present: the subset of articles accidentally in early positions fared measurably better in the long-term citation record than those lower down. Astrophysics articles announced in position 1, for example, overall received a median number of citations 83\% higher, while those there accidentally had a 44\% visibility boost. For two large subcommunities of theoretical high energy physics, hep-th and hep-ph articles announced in position 1 had median numbers of citations 50\% and 100\% larger than for positions 5--15, and the subsets there accidentally had visibility boosts of 38\% and 71\%. We also consider the positional effects on early readership. The median numbers of early full text downloads for astro-ph, hep-th, and hep-ph articles announced in position 1 were 82\%, 61\%, and 58\% higher than for lower positions, respectively, and those there accidentally had medians visibility-boosted by 53\%, 44\%, and 46\%. Finally, we correlate a variety of readership features with long-term citations, using machine learning methods, thereby extending previous results on the predictive power of early readership in a broader context. We conclude with some observations on impact metrics and dangers of recommender mechanisms.

Are the e-prints (electronic preprints) from the arXiv repository being used instead of the journal articles? In this paper we show that the e-prints have not undermined the usage of journal papers in the astrophysics community. As soon as the journal article is published, the astronomical community prefers to read the journal article and the use of e-prints through the NASA Astrophysics Data System drops to zero. This suggests that the majority of astronomers have access to institutional subscriptions and that they choose to read the journal article when given the choice. Within the NASA Astrophysics Data System they are given this choice, because the e-print and the journal article are treated equally, since both are just one click away. In other words, the e-prints have not undermined journal use in the astrophysics community and thus currently do not pose a financial threat to the publishers. We present readership data for the arXiv category "astro-ph" and the 4 core journals in astronomy (Astrophysical Journal, Astronomical Journal, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society and Astronomy & Astrophysics). Furthermore, we show that the half-life (the point where the use of an article drops to half the use of a newly published article) for an e-print is shorter than for a journal paper. The ADS is funded by NASA Grant NNG06GG68G. arXiv receives funding from NSF award #0404553