arXiv Papers Scraper

Search arXiv through its official API by keyword, category and submission date. Returns title, abstract, authors, categories, dates, DOI, journal reference and PDF links, newest first.

Uses only official/public data endpoints, paces requests to respect the source's rate limits, retries transient errors, removes duplicates and returns clean, flat, consistently typed JSON, CSV or Excel.

Use cases

• Track new AI/ML, physics or math research daily
• Build literature-review and RAG datasets
• Analyse publication trends by category

Input

Field	Type	Description	Default
query	string	Keywords or arXiv syntax: ti:, au:, abs:, all:, AND/OR/ANDNOT. Plain phrases are searched in all fields.	—
categories	array	arXiv categories, e.g. cs.CL, cs.LG, stat.ML, astro-ph.	[]
submittedFrom	string	Earliest submission date. Format: YYYY-MM-DD.	—
submittedTo	string	Latest submission date. Format: YYYY-MM-DD.	—
sortBy	string	Ordering field.	"submittedDate"
sortOrder	string	descending = newest first.	"descending"
maxItems	integer	Maximum number of results to save (and pay for). The run stops as soon as this many unique results are saved.	100

Example input:

{
  "query": "large language model",
  "categories": [
    "cs.CL"
  ],
  "maxItems": 20
}

Output

Each result is one flat record with these fields (missing values are null, lists are []):

Field	Type
arxivId	string
version	integer
title	string
abstract	string
authors	array
firstAuthor	string
authorCount	integer
primaryCategory	string
categories	array
published	string
updated	string
doi	string
journalRef	string
comment	string
url	string
pdfUrl	string

Example result:

{
  "arxivId": "2610.40627",
  "version": 1,
  "title": "ShallowDefend: Harnessing Shallow Safety Alignment for Multi-Turn Defender",
  "abstract": "Safety alignment has enabled large language models to reliably refuse harmful requests directly, yet the same request distributed across a multi-turn conversation still succeeds far too often. This brittleness has a mechanistic root: Alignment is shallow, with safety behavior concentrated in a model's first few output tokens, and existing defenses inherit the weakness, supervising the surface form of the response without ever giving the model an explicit safety decision to learn. We take the opposite view of shallowness: if a short span determines the trajectory of an entire response, that span is the highest-leverage place to intervene, and the defender can occupy it first. We propose Assess $\\to$ Decide $\\to$ Respond, a framework in which the defender assesses the user's intent, commits to an explicit, parseable safety decision, and only then generates a reply conditioned on it, with the commitment trained by reinforcement learning at the payload turn. Because the decision is a token span, the reward can be a rule: a self-verified reward checks the committed label against the conversation's known nature, requiring no judge and no annotation, while the same format also supports an LLM-as-judge reward over a graded decision space with safe redirection. Across two model families and fourteen benchmarks spanning safety, utility, and helpfulness, our defenders achieve the strongest multi-turn safety in a controlled comparison, maintaining their lead in safety while preserving utility at a modest cost to helpfulness. A per-token KL analysis and interventional probes confirm why this works: training concentrates its effect on the brief deliberation that sets a response's trajectory, and the decision committed there is a causal control point. The very shallowness attackers exploit becomes the mechanism of defense.",
  "authors": [
    "Qiyao Ma",
    "Xiaodong Liu",
    "Weiwei Yang",
    "Mingqian Feng",
    "Chengquan Guo",
    "Jialin Song",
    "Carolyn Buractaon",
    "Zhe Zhao",
    "Junshan Zhang",
    "Sandeep Atluri",
    "Christopher White",
    "Jianfeng Gao"
  ],
  "firstAuthor": "Qiyao Ma",
  "authorCount": 12,
  "primaryCategory": "cs.CL",
  "categories": [
    "cs.CL"
  ],
  "published": "2026-10-29T17:56:53Z",
  "updated": "2026-10-29T17:56:53Z",
  "doi": null,
  "journalRef": null,
  "comment": null,
  "url": "https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.40627",
  "pdfUrl": "https://arxiv.org/pdf/2610.40627v1"
}

The Overview dataset view shows the key columns as a table; export everything as JSON, CSV, Excel or via API.

Pricing

Pay per result: you are charged one result event for each saved record (suggested $1.00 per 1,000 results), plus nothing for duplicates, failed requests or empty runs. The run stops automatically at your Max results setting or at the maximum total charge you set for the run, whichever comes first.

FAQ

Is this legal / allowed? It reads publicly available data from official public sources and follows their published rate limits. Check the source's terms for your use case.

Why did I get fewer results than Max results? Your filters matched fewer records, or the source caps how many it returns (see Limitations).

What happens on errors? Transient errors (timeouts, rate limits, 5xx) are retried with exponential backoff. Invalid input stops the run immediately with a message explaining what to fix.

Can I schedule it? Yes, use Apify Schedules; duplicates within a run are removed automatically.

Limitations

• arXiv asks for at most one request every 3 seconds, so large runs take time (about 200 papers per 3 s).
• arXiv caps a single query at 30,000 results.
• Results depend on the public source; if it is down, the actor retries with backoff and then fails with a clear message (you are not charged for results that were not saved).