Fancier AASTeX63 and aasjournal.bst format

[seawander]

I'd like to push an update to aastex63.cls and aasjournal.bst files to make the output fancier. It includes:

1. Double-columned appendix. I found a typo in aastex62.cls, which only allowed single-columned appendix. It is now corrected for both 62 and 63.
2. Well-formatted references. The output looks like the published version, i.e., DOI imbedded on journal names, and ADSURL embedded on volume/pages.
3. Better-formatted titles, i.e., bold and non-capitalized section names, subsection names in italics, etc.

I have already made a GitHub repo at https://github.com/seawander/aastex_pwned to demonstrate what I said above. And an example output is available at https://github.com/seawander/aastex_pwned/blob/master/ms.pdf.

-- Bin

p.s.: I tried to search for aastex63.cls file to push a merge request, but I was unable to locate it in GitHub. @AAS_Publishing twitter account told me to open an issue here.

[augustfly]

Hi, yes, I suggested opening this thread to discuss this as we didn't yet have 6.3 up for a PR. We also rarely take PRs as the person who does development doesn't use GitHub and it is somewhat confusing to keep the two development bases in sync.

For your No.1 and 3 improvements, we appreciate that you wish to submit these edits and improvements. I'd have to ask @gregschwarz if the two column appendix bug is fixed in our version of 6.3. Let's see if we can compare and merge in your edits once we get 6.3 posted.

For No.2: we intentionally include the DOI string in the inline text and not as an obscured anchor link. AASTeX is a means for us to help authors prepare manuscripts that are suitable for peer review, author sharing, and for conversion of the final submitted version into fully structured XML/HTML. Inline DOIs strings allow direct text mining of the DOIs and are thus preferred over anchor links for preparing manuscripts. It is also a broader solution when dealing with manuscripts that are not indexed by ADS and thus have a DOI but not a bibcode.

It is true that the inline DOIs make the reference section longer, but I don't see a cause for concern about the length of a manuscript, do you?

let's continue to chat. AASTeX issues have been pretty quiet lately -- many will get closed when we/I get around to posting 6.3.

[seawander]

Thank you for the reply!

For No. 2, I understand the reason of explicit DOI’s now. The reason why I added ADSURL is that most of the DOI’s will require access to the papers, except when you are in your university/institute or when you are getting AAS papers that are more than 1 year old, but ADS will provide broader access to things like arXiv, data, etc. In terms of manuscript preparing, I believe that most of the papers are in electronic form now, so showing the strings is probably needed only when people print them.

If the papers are indexed by ADS, then people can easily copy and paste the ADS BibTeX format to their script, and thus allowing for easier access and better communication within the astronomy community as you mentioned (especially for the authors/readers) — personally I think it should be preferred to DOI if there is ADSURL.

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1908.00006.pdf is a real paper that I used the template that I mentioned above.

Cheers, Bin

[hippke]

@seawander I like your bst file and would love to use it as it has nicer color hyperlinks, but it doesn't work properly for "ArXiv e-prints". Can you check?

[seawander]

Hi @hippke , I tried the example on https://github.com/AASJournals/AASTeX60/issues/91#event-2683987062 , and it does properly show

Batygin, K., Adams, F. C., Brown, M. E., & Becker, J. C. 2019, arXiv, arXiv:1902.10103

(with the first "arXiv" linked to the arxiv address, and the second one to the ADS link).

Could you provide a reproducible BibTeX example? I probably had spotted it and fixed it in a more recent version at https://github.com/seawander/aastex_pwned.

[hippke]

Thanks. It does indeed work in the most recent version that you linked. A relic of wrong formatting (which is uncritical but imperfect) is still present. For this BibTeX I get the reference Barbato, D., Bonomo, A. S., Sozzetti, A., & Morbidelli, R. 2018, arXiv, arXiv:1811.08249. https://arxiv.org/abs/1811.08249 where the word "arXiv" already has the Link to arxiv.org (in pink color like DOI links); the hyperlink at the end is then redundant.

[hippke]

In contrast. for this BibTeX I just get Messerschmitt, D. G. 2013, ArXiv e-prints. https://arxiv.org/abs/1305.4684 without the pink link to ADS. Why is that missing? The ADS link is available in the BibTeX.

[seawander]

I tried both examples you gave me -- neither is weird and I believe I had fixed what you saw above. In the References section of a PDF file that I generated using the modified aastex63.cls (https://github.com/seawander/aastex_pwned/blob/master/aastex63.cls) and aasjournal.bst (https://github.com/seawander/aastex_pwned/blob/master/aasjournal.bst), they are

Barbato, D., Bonomo, A. S., Sozzetti, A., & Morbidelli, R. 2018, arXiv, arXiv:1811.08249 Messerschmitt, D. G. 2013, arXiv, arXiv:1305.4684

Like my previous reply, for both items, the first "arXiv" is linked to arXiv, and "arXiv:xxxx.xxxxx" is linked to ADS url.

Just FYI, I'm using the most recent version of TeXShop (and pdflatexmk) for typesetting on a Mac, and it also works on Overleaf + pdflatex. I remember encountering similar issues like what you reported before, and they may be caused/fixed by (1) there is an old and repeating BibTeX item and TeXShop is likely using the old one. (2) deleting the temporary files and repeated entry/entries.

[seawander]

@hippke Just in case you didn't notice my reply above.

[adamamiller]

I would like to "upvote" the three issues discussed in this thread for future versions of AASTeX (1 and 2 seem particularly important for generating papers with nicer formatting, and that look more similar to the final journal content).