The arXiv LaTeX Cleaner is a tool that automatically cleans up LaTeX source code for submission to arXiv, improving compliance and reducing potential processing errors. It addresses common issues like removing disallowed commands, fixing figure path problems, and converting EPS figures to PDF. The cleaner also standardizes fonts, removes unnecessary packages, and reduces file sizes, ultimately streamlining the arXiv submission process and promoting wider paper accessibility.
The ArXiv LaTeX Cleaner, a tool developed by Google Research and available on GitHub, addresses the common issue of LaTeX source code becoming cluttered and unwieldy during the writing and revision process of academic papers, particularly those intended for submission to the arXiv preprint server. This accumulation of unnecessary packages, commands, and commented-out text can lead to larger file sizes, slower compilation times, and potential compatibility problems when the arXiv processing system attempts to render the submitted document. The cleaner aims to streamline the LaTeX code, making it more concise and efficient without altering the rendered output.
The tool achieves this cleaning through a series of automated processes. It identifies and removes unused packages, eliminating dependencies that are not actively contributing to the final document. It also deletes commented-out code blocks, which are often remnants of previous drafts or exploratory coding attempts. Furthermore, the cleaner simplifies the preamble by removing redundant or unnecessary commands and declarations. This contributes to a cleaner and more manageable preamble section, improving readability and maintainability.
Beyond these core functionalities, the ArXiv LaTeX Cleaner provides options for more aggressive cleaning strategies. These options allow users to remove auxiliary files that are not essential for compilation on the arXiv, further reducing the submission size. The tool can also be configured to flatten the directory structure of the submission, consolidating all necessary files into a single directory, simplifying the submission process and reducing the risk of missing dependencies.
The project is open-source, allowing for community contributions and adaptations. Users can easily integrate the cleaner into their existing LaTeX workflow through command-line usage or by utilizing the provided Docker container, ensuring platform compatibility. This flexibility enables researchers to incorporate the tool seamlessly into their preferred writing and submission processes. The project's GitHub repository includes detailed documentation and examples, facilitating easy adoption and customization to suit individual needs. The cleaner serves as a valuable resource for the academic community, promoting cleaner, more efficient LaTeX code practices and ultimately contributing to a smoother arXiv submission experience.
Summary of Comments ( 33 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42890383
Hacker News users generally praised the arXiv LaTeX cleaner for its potential to improve the consistency and readability of submitted papers. Several commenters highlighted the tool's ability to strip unnecessary packages and commands, leading to smaller file sizes and faster processing. Some expressed hope that this would become a standard pre-submission step, while others were more cautious, pointing to the possibility of unintended consequences like breaking custom formatting or introducing subtle errors. The ability to remove comments was also a point of discussion, with some finding it useful for cleaning up draft versions before submission, while others worried about losing valuable context. A few commenters suggested additional features, like converting EPS figures to PDF and adding a DOI badge to the title page. Overall, the reception was positive, with many seeing the tool as a valuable contribution to the academic writing process.
The Hacker News post discussing Google Research's ArXiv LaTeX Cleaner has generated several comments exploring various aspects of the tool and its implications.
Several users express appreciation for the tool, highlighting its potential to improve the consistency and readability of LaTeX submissions to arXiv. One commenter specifically mentions how beneficial this would be for reviewers, making the review process smoother. Others agree, pointing out the frequent inconsistencies and messy LaTeX they encounter in preprints.
Some comments delve into the specifics of the cleaner's functionality. One user questions whether the tool addresses the issue of inconsistent capitalization in bibliography entries, a common problem in LaTeX documents. Another inquires about the handling of specific LaTeX packages and commands, expressing concern that the cleaner might remove necessary elements. A subsequent reply clarifies that the tool offers options to preserve certain commands and environments, addressing these concerns. There's also discussion around whether the tool corrects for specific journal requirements or simply standardizes the LaTeX for arXiv, with general agreement that it's focused on the latter.
The conversation also touches upon the broader implications of such a tool. One commenter speculates on the potential for automated LaTeX cleanup to become integrated into the arXiv submission process itself. Another expresses skepticism, suggesting that authors might resist such automation, preferring to maintain control over their LaTeX source. The debate around automated versus manual cleanup highlights the tension between standardization and authorial autonomy.
One user raises the point that the existence of such a tool underscores the limitations of LaTeX, arguing that a more modern markup language might be preferable. This sparks a brief discussion on the merits and drawbacks of LaTeX, with some defending its flexibility and power despite its complexities.
Finally, some comments focus on practical aspects of using the tool. One user requests information on how to integrate the cleaner into their existing LaTeX workflow. Another shares their experience using the tool, reporting positive results and highlighting specific features they found useful. This practical feedback offers valuable insights for potential users.
Overall, the comments reflect a generally positive reception of the ArXiv LaTeX Cleaner, acknowledging its potential to address the prevalent issue of messy LaTeX in arXiv submissions. The discussion also touches on broader topics such as the future of LaTeX and the balance between automation and author control in academic publishing.