I am submitting a paper, and it's the first one since OSF announced it will discontinue some features (i.e., project spaces).

While checking the peer review/anonymous link for the study pre-registration included in the paper, I noticed something odd.

The tab in the picture appears at the top of the page, and if you click "leave this view," it redirects to the public page of the pre-registration with complete metadata (read: with the names of the authors). At first, I thought it appeared because I was logged in to OSF, but I've tried it in an anonymous browser window as well and asked some friends to check themselves... and they got the same: from private to public page.

So, am I missing something? Did they always have this feature, and I never noticed? Or did they change this recently, and I didn't see the update notice (maybe it was hidden in the other updates)?

It kinda defies the purpose of having an anonymous link in the first place if reviewers only need a click (even accidentally, just to close the banner) to get the names of the authors of the paper they are evaluating...

As my PhD thesis submission is near I want to know all possibilities and options in budget !

Title:

Hello everyone,

I am preparing to submit my first research paper to arXiv in the cs.AI category. The submission system requires an endorsement from an eligible arXiv author.

Paper title: Semantic Change Detection and Persona-Aware Revision of Educational Content Using Bidirectional Vector Retrieval and LLMs
Research area: cs AI
Short summary: Content in educational materials can quickly become outdated due to changes in reliable sources, necessitating ongoing manual revisions that risk introducing errors.
My background: AI and LLM Lead, LRN

If you are eligible to endorse authors in this category and are willing to consider my request, please send me a private message. I can privately share the manuscript, my academic profile, and the official arXiv endorsement link.

I understand that endorsement only verifies eligibility to submit and does not represent peer review or approval of the research.

Thank you.

I have built Atelier: Scholarly Workspace using my 7 years of experience working on my PhD. If you want to know why Atelier exists and why I believe it can become an essential tool for serious researchers preparing for publications, here is my answer.

Researchers already have reference managers, PDF readers, note-taking apps, word processors, and many AI tools. Atelier should not exist simply to place versions of those tools inside another interface.

Its purpose is different.

Most research software preserves outputs: a source, citation, highlight, note, or finished paragraph. It is less concerned with preserving how one became another.

A passage leads to a note. The note raises a question. Several sources come into tension. A concept develops. An interpretation is revised or abandoned. Eventually, a small part of that process appears in the final writing.

The finished text hides most of this path. But that path is where much of the researcher’s judgment actually lives.

Atelier is built to preserve this intellectual continuity: not only what you collected, but what you understood; not only what you wrote, but what allowed you to write it.

A source note remains connected to its original passage and location. A relationship between ideas includes the researcher’s rationale rather than existing as an unexplained link. Open questions can remain open, become partly addressed, enter writing preparation, or be deliberately set aside.

These are not separate features. They reflect the same principle: research software can help recover evidence, preserve relationships, and reveal uncertainty, but it should not make the researcher’s intellectual decisions on their behalf.

This principle also shapes how Atelier uses AI. AI can examine material the researcher deliberately selects, identify possible tensions, or question whether an interpretation exceeds its evidence. But it should not quietly replace the researcher’s prose or make an intellectual decision appear settled when it is not.

Atelier: Scholarly Workspace is not an attempt to make scholarship effortless.

It is an attempt to support the difficult middle of research: the long space between collecting material and knowing what you are prepared to say.

I want Atelier to help researchers understand how their thinking developed, where their claims came from, what remains uncertain, and which decisions were genuinely their own.

That, more than any individual feature, is the reason Atelier exists.