pith. sign in

arxiv: 2606.31302 · v1 · pith:P46MK3B5new · submitted 2026-06-30 · 💻 cs.DL

Diamond Fractures: Tracing Journal Transitions Away from Diamond Open Access

Lisa Matthias , Juan Pablo Alperin , Mikael Laakso This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-07-01 02:50 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 💻 cs.DL
keywords diamond open accessjournal transitionsarticle processing chargesopen access modelsDOAJpublishing sustainabilityOJS
0
0 comments X

The pith

More than 440 journals that once published free for readers and authors have transitioned away from diamond open access, mostly by adding article charges.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper defines diamond fractures as cases in which journals abandon the model of publishing at no cost to readers or authors. Using publisher records, historical fee lists, DOAJ removal data, and an OJS survey, the authors document over 440 such transitions and map their distribution by publisher, field, region, and target model. Most move to APC-based publishing at prices from eight to five thousand three hundred dollars. The work shows these changes often occur in established journals and coincide with shifts in output volume. A sympathetic reader would see this as evidence that diamond open access faces ongoing leakage rather than steady growth.

Core claim

The paper establishes that diamond fractures number more than 440, with the large majority consisting of shifts to APC-funded models priced between eight and five thousand three hundred dollars; these transitions are spread across publisher types, disciplines, and regions, occur at varying journal ages, and are accompanied by changes in publication volume around the time of the change.

What carries the argument

Diamond fractures, the documented instances in which journals that had published free for both readers and authors switch to subscription or APC models.

If this is right

  • Most diamond fractures end in APC models rather than subscription models.
  • APC prices at the moment of transition already span more than three orders of magnitude.
  • Fractures occur across commercial, university, and society publishers and across many disciplines and world regions.
  • Journals that fracture tend to be older than average diamond journals and show measurable volume changes near the transition date.
  • Continued normalization of APC mandates is expected to increase the rate of future fractures.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Sustained public funding for non-APC infrastructure could alter the economic conditions that make leaving diamond OA the easiest option.
  • Monitoring future DOAJ removals against the current baseline would provide an early indicator of whether the fracture rate is rising.
  • The documented price range at first transition suggests that later fee escalation, already observed in other APC journals, could compound author costs over time.

Load-bearing premise

The combination of publisher OA portfolio records, historical APC lists, DOAJ removal logs, and OJS survey data captures nearly all diamond fractures without large-scale undercounting, overcounting, or misclassification.

What would settle it

An exhaustive manual audit of every journal ever removed from DOAJ or listed in publisher portfolios that finds the true number of diamond fractures is either far below 400 or far above 500 would directly test the reported scale.

read the original abstract

While much attention has been paid to journals transitioning toward Diamond Open Access (OA), comparatively little is known about those moving in the opposite direction. We introduce the concept of "diamond fractures"--instances in which journals that once published freely for both readers and authors subsequently abandoned that model, transitioning to subscription-based or article processing charge (APC)-funded publishing. Drawing on publisher OA portfolio records, historical APC lists, removal logs from the Directory of Open Access Journals, and a survey of journals using Open Journal Systems, we identified and characterized more than 440 journals that have undergone such fractures and analyzed how they are distributed across publisher types, disciplines, and regions; which models journals transition to and at what price points; how old journals are when they fracture; and how publication volume shifts in the period surrounding the transition. This paper reports on more than 440 confirmed fractures, the majority of which involve transitions to charging APCs, ranging from $8 to $5,300. These findings raise urgent questions about the stability of diamond OA as a publishing ecosystem. The transition to APCs--even at initially modest price points--follows well-documented warnings about the hyperinflationary tendencies of author-pays models, in which charges introduced as a pragmatic stopgap have repeatedly escalated over time. The rate of fractures are likely to intensify as APC-based publishing continues to be normalized through funder mandates and commercial OA incentives. Diamond fractures demand to be treated not as isolated institutional decisions but as a systemic risk--one that can only be addressed through sustained investment in community-governed infrastructure and funding models that reduce the conditions under which abandoning diamond OA becomes the path of least resistance.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper introduces the term 'diamond fractures' to describe journals that transitioned away from diamond open access (no reader or author fees) to subscription or APC-based models. Drawing on publisher OA portfolio records, historical APC lists, DOAJ removal logs, and an OJS survey, it reports identifying and characterizing more than 440 such fractures, then analyzes their distribution by publisher type, discipline, and region; the models and price points of transitions (mostly to APCs ranging $8–$5,300); journal age at fracture; and changes in publication volume around the transition. The work concludes that these fractures indicate systemic instability in diamond OA and calls for sustained investment in community-governed infrastructure.

Significance. If the identification and characterization of the >440 fractures prove robust, the paper supplies the first large-scale empirical map of transitions away from diamond OA, a direction that has received far less attention than the reverse. The quantitative breakdown by publisher, discipline, price, and volume provides concrete data that could inform funder policies and infrastructure planning; the explicit linkage to documented APC inflation risks adds a falsifiable prediction about future fracture rates.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract / Methods] Abstract and Methods (implied data-construction section): the claim of 'more than 440 confirmed fractures' rests on the assumption that each case was verifiably diamond OA prior to transition, yet DOAJ removal logs record only indexing exits without prior fee status, historical APC lists are incomplete snapshots, and publisher portfolio records plus the OJS survey introduce selection and recall biases. Without per-journal validation against archived policies or explicit error analysis, the central count and all downstream distributions (publisher type, discipline, price points) risk inflation by false positives.
  2. [Results] Results on transition models and price points: the reported APC range ($8–$5,300) and the statement that 'the majority' transition to APCs are load-bearing for the policy conclusion about hyperinflationary tendencies, but the paper provides no breakdown of how many cases were validated as previously fee-free versus those inferred from absence in APC lists.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Introduction] The term 'diamond fractures' is introduced without a formal definition or decision tree showing the exact criteria used to classify a journal as having been diamond OA before the transition.
  2. [Results] Figure or table presenting the 440+ cases should include a column or note on the primary data source for each fracture to allow readers to assess source-specific biases.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the careful and constructive review. The comments highlight important methodological considerations regarding data validation and transparency. We address each major comment below and indicate planned revisions.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract / Methods] Abstract and Methods (implied data-construction section): the claim of 'more than 440 confirmed fractures' rests on the assumption that each case was verifiably diamond OA prior to transition, yet DOAJ removal logs record only indexing exits without prior fee status, historical APC lists are incomplete snapshots, and publisher portfolio records plus the OJS survey introduce selection and recall biases. Without per-journal validation against archived policies or explicit error analysis, the central count and all downstream distributions (publisher type, discipline, price points) risk inflation by false positives.

    Authors: We acknowledge the inherent challenges in confirming prior diamond status across all cases, as no single archival source covers every journal comprehensively. Our identification process triangulates evidence from publisher OA portfolio records (which explicitly document prior diamond status), absence from historical APC lists, DOAJ removal logs aligned with model changes, and OJS survey responses confirming fee-free history. While this multi-source approach reduces the likelihood of false positives compared to any single indicator, we did not conduct exhaustive per-journal policy archiving for the full set. In the revised manuscript we will expand the Methods section with a detailed account of the identification criteria, cross-verification steps, and an explicit discussion of potential error sources and confidence bounds. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Results] Results on transition models and price points: the reported APC range ($8–$5,300) and the statement that 'the majority' transition to APCs are load-bearing for the policy conclusion about hyperinflationary tendencies, but the paper provides no breakdown of how many cases were validated as previously fee-free versus those inferred from absence in APC lists.

    Authors: We agree that greater transparency on the evidentiary basis for each fracture would strengthen the results. The current manuscript reports aggregate figures derived from the combined sources but does not disaggregate by validation type. In the revised version we will add a table or subsection in Results that breaks down the 440+ cases according to the primary confirming evidence (direct publisher or survey confirmation versus inference from APC-list absence), while retaining the overall APC range and majority-to-APC finding. This will allow readers to assess the robustness of those specific claims. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: purely empirical identification from external records

full rationale

The paper performs an empirical count and characterization of journal transitions using independent external data sources (publisher portfolios, historical APC lists, DOAJ removal logs, OJS survey). No equations, fitted parameters, predictions, or derivations are present. Central claims rest on data collection and classification rather than any self-referential definitions or self-citation chains. This matches the default expectation for non-circular empirical work.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 1 invented entities

The central claim depends on the assumption that the listed data sources are sufficiently complete and accurate to identify fractures; no free parameters or invented physical entities are involved.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Publisher OA portfolio records, historical APC lists, DOAJ removal logs, and OJS survey responses accurately reflect journal business model changes without major gaps or errors.
    Invoked when stating the identification of more than 440 fractures from these sources.
invented entities (1)
  • diamond fractures no independent evidence
    purpose: Label for journals that abandoned diamond OA for paid models
    New term coined in the paper to frame the observed transitions.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5834 in / 1235 out tokens · 46243 ms · 2026-07-01T02:50:37.425375+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

4 extracted references · 4 canonical work pages · 1 internal anchor

  1. [1]

    P., & Fischman, G

    Alperin, J. P., & Fischman, G. E. (Eds.). (2015). Made in Latin America: Open access, scholarly journals, and regional innovations (First edition). CLACSO. FLACSO-Brasil. Latindex. Redalyc. SciELO. PKP. Alperin, J. P., & Rozemblum, C. (2017). La reinterpretación de visibilidad y calidad en las nuevas políticas de evaluación de revistas científicas. Revist...

    work page doi:10.17533/udea.rib.v40n3a04 2015

  2. [2]

    platinum route

    Discursos del Sur, revista de teoría crítica en Ciencias Sociales , (13), 87–106. https://doi.org/10.15381/dds.n13.28656 Crawford, W. (2025). Gold Open Access 2025: Articles in Journals 2020–2024 (GOA10) . https://waltcrawford.name/goa25.pdf 18 scholcommlab.ca DFG. (2025, January 23). DFG fördert nationale Servicestelle für Diamond Open Access . https://w...

    work page doi:10.15381/dds.n13.28656 2025

  3. [3]

    https://doi.org/10.3390/publications7020023 Momeni, F., Dietze, S., Mayr, P., Biesenbender, K., & Peters, I. (2023). Which Factors are associated with Open Access Publishing? A Springer Nature Case Study. Quantitative Science Studies , 4 (2), 353–371. https://doi.org/10.1162/qss_a_00253 20 scholcommlab.ca National Institutes of Health. (2025, July 30). Re...

    work page doi:10.3390/publications7020023 2023

  4. [4]

    https://doi.org/10.3390/publications14010020 Toluca-Cape Town Declaration . (2024). https://ibali.uct.ac.za/s/doasummit/item/190359 21 scholcommlab.ca van Walsum, S., Matthias, L., Alperin, J. P., & Haustein, S. (2026). When Editors Revolt: Characterizing Journal Declarations of Independence (arXiv:2606.30394). arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2606.30394 22

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.3390/publications14010020 2024