Association for Computing Machinery vs arXiv — Discipline
How rigorously each source backs its factual claims with verifiable evidence.
Association for Computing Machinery outscores arXiv on Citation Discipline by 18 points (A+ · 96 vs B · 78).
Association for Computing Machinery
Peer-review across ACM journals + conferences (SIGGRAPH, CHI, etc.); methodology rigorous.
arXiv
Moderation-only filter (not peer-review). Endorsement system catches obvious quality issues; substantive review is downstream.
Global rank · Discipline
Why these Discipline scores
Peer-review across ACM journals + conferences (SIGGRAPH, CHI, etc.); methodology rigorous.
Moderation-only filter (not peer-review). Endorsement system catches obvious quality issues; substantive review is downstream.
Signals behind the Discipline score
- ACM peer reviewStandardized academic peer-review process.
- Endorsement systemNew submitters need an endorsement from an established author.
- Pre-peer-reviewPapers may be revised, retracted, or never published in journals.
Other dimensions for Association for Computing Machinery vs arXiv
Other Discipline comparisons
Sources & references
Every score on this page is read from the two publications below and graded against the published rubric. No score is bought, estimated or supplied by the source being scored.
- Source evaluated — Association for Computing Machinery (dl.acm.org) · verified · full scoring record
- Source evaluated — arXiv (arxiv.org) · verified · full scoring record
- Scoring rubric — SourceScore Index, Citation Discipline, Modern Reference, Citation Velocity (methodology v0.1)
- Machine-readable record — /api/compare/acm-vs-arxiv/discipline.json