The dissemination and reach of scientific knowledge have increased at a blistering pace. In this context, e-Print servers have played a central role by providing scientists with a rapid and open mechanism for disseminating research without waiting for the (lengthy) peer review process. While helping the scientific community in several ways, e-Print servers also provide scientific communicators and the general public with access to a wealth of knowledge without paying hefty subscription fees. This motivates us to study how e-Prints are positioned within Web community discussions. In this paper, we analyze data from two Web communities: 14 years of Reddit data and over 4 from 4chan's Politically Incorrect board. Our findings highlight the presence of e-Prints in both science-enthusiast and general-audience communities. Real-world events and distinct factors influence the e-Prints people's discussions; e.g., there was a surge of COVID-19-related research publications during the early months of the outbreak and increased references to e-Prints in online discussions. Text in e-Prints and in online discussions referencing them has a low similarity, suggesting that the latter are not exclusively talking about the findings in the former. Further, our analysis of a sample of threads highlights: 1) misinterpretation and generalization of research findings, 2) early research findings being amplified as a source for future predictions, and 3) questioning findings from a pseudoscientific e-Print. Overall, our work emphasizes the need to quickly and effectively validate non-peer-reviewed e-Prints that get substantial press/social media coverage to help mitigate wrongful interpretations of scientific outputs.

翻译：科学知识的传播与覆盖范围正以惊人的速度增长。在此背景下，e-Print服务器发挥了核心作用，为科研人员提供了一种快速且开放的机制，使其无需等待（漫长的）同行评审过程即可传播研究成果。e-Print服务器在多个方面助力科学界的同时，也让科学传播者和普通公众无需支付高昂的订阅费用即可获取大量知识。这促使我们研究e-Print在Web社区讨论中的定位。本文分析了来自两个Web社区的数据：Reddit上14年的数据以及4chan政治不正确版块超过4年的数据。研究结果突显了e-Print在科学爱好者和普通受众社区中的存在。现实事件和不同因素影响着人们讨论的e-Print内容；例如，在疫情爆发初期，与COVID-19相关的研究出版物激增，在线讨论中对e-Print的引用也随之增加。e-Print文本与引用它们的在线讨论文本之间的相似度较低，表明后者并非仅讨论前者中的发现。此外，对样本讨论串的分析揭示了：1）对研究结果的误解和泛化，2）早期研究结果被放大并作为未来预测的来源，以及3）对来自伪科学e-Print的研究结果提出质疑。总体而言，我们的工作强调了快速有效验证那些得到大量新闻/社交媒体报道的非同行评审e-Print的必要性，以帮助减少对科学成果的错误解读。