Tag Info

New answers tagged

1

Thanks for clarifying. Don't worry about the effect this would have on your future chances with this paper and this journal. If this pre-submission step fails, that is an indication that the classic approach would also fail. Either they feel it's worth sending out for review or they don't. But send the whole thing, not just the abstract. They need to be ...


0

The conference did not claim any copyrights! Are you sure about this? Moreover, even without a copyright transfer or similar, you could have agreed to not having submitted or published the paper elsewhere. If exceptions are being made for publishing preprints, they are often explicit exceptions to clauses that forbid you publishing the article ...


4

In computer science some legit conferences charge per accepted publication. In my experience, legit but small conferences perform this practice, perhaps to better cover the organization costs. Bigger conferences are often sponsored by big partners, e.g., Google, Microsoft, Facebook, Cisco, .., so they do not need to look for money elsewhere. Generally ...


2

I've contacted journals before submission, but usually only to check how long they take to do a review, and to confirm/check that they do quick rejections. Quick rejections are good - it's horrible when they keep you waiting six months only to send you a review telling you your manuscript sucks or is unreadable. I always wonder that, if it is so bad, why ...


1

I'm not aware of a resource that limits searching in this way but if you are interested only in open access journals you could try using advanced searching on the http://doaj.org. Neither the search interface nor the content may be the same quality of the databases, but it would limit you to resources that were universally available. However, this seems ...


0

Web of Knowledge or Web of Science are probably the best tools for this, but if they are not available to you there is a free software called Publish or Perish that can help make sense of the Google Scholar citation measures.


0

I would recommend checking the thesaurus of a database that is likely to be searched for your discipline for relevant keywords and compare yours to the keywords indexed within that database to match your terms to an appropriate taxonomy. Singular or plural form is unlikely to matter, but listing phrases instead of breaking the keywords down to strict terms ...


18

To write this in more detail, the text of the questions is clearly owned by the copyright holder. The ideas embodied in the questions are not protected by copyright. It's usually considered plagiarism to completely rephrase and rewrite a question without citing the original source, but plagiarism generally isn't illegal. As noted in the downvoted answer, ...


-1

Copying questions from textbooks etc. and pasting them with a little or no change in something (homework sheet, exam, etc.) without citation is technically illegal, as the questions of another person are still his creative property. But, it is still a common practice (at least where I live) for professors to “steal” exercises from textbooks or previous ...


9

Like all other creative material in the text, the exercises belong to the copyright holder. For some exercises, which have a fairly complicated statement (e.g., a word problem), this should be quite clear. For simpler exercises, e.g., a simple set of integrals, the individual exercises (e.g., "Integrate x^2") may not be significant enough to be ...


3

@user6726 may have a different opinion, but at least in the US, the intellectual property for everything you do as part of your job rests with your employer. Whether you list the employer or not on your paper has absolutely nothing to do with it. Whether your employer will ultimately choose to enforce their ownership and share proceeds with you is of course ...


5

The question is a legal one, so it would depend on what legal system you're subject to. Ideas per se cannot be legally owned, but via patent and copyright you can own the expression of ideas. With a patent, there is a legal process that you need to go through, to gain legal ownership over, say, a method of converting speech to text. If that's the case, you ...


0

I am not sure if there is any clear cut criteria for choosing program committee. A guideline is to choose people who are experienced in the area of the conference and who you think would be willing to review the submitted work. You will need to approach the organizers/publishers with a conference proposal. Look into the webpages of IEEE and ACM. I am not ...


3

As Alexandros says, first you need to make certain that the journal you are submitting to allows content reuse by the typical guidelines, as not all journals do, even in CS. Assuming that is the case, the typical custom is to wait until your shorter paper is accepted to a conference, though it doesn't matter if acceptance has been announced to anybody ...


6

Neither. PhD admissions committees at strong departments are looking for clear evidence of potential for high-quality independent research. Test scores only matter if they're low. In particular, if your math score is low, there will be serious doubts about your math ability, and if your verbal/TOEFL score is low, there will be serious questions about your ...


0

My comment would not invalidate paper B So you are in a very different situation than the post you quote. In your case you can manage so that your comment is not harmfull to the authors of B. You clearly seem interested into getting a reward by publishing your idea (I do not say this in a negative way), so I would do something like III. I do not think ...


8

Based on what you describe, I would see it as exceedingly likely that the journal is indeed fake. I would formally retract the paper at the journal, and afterwards discontinue all dealings with them. They will likely not answer, but I would just assume that the entire submission is dead as soon as you have told them that you wish to retract. The will likely ...


2

There is one behavior that is encouraged: vociferously advocate to change the mainstream publishing model to cater the needs of authors to publish more stuff instead of providing the readership with quality, curated scientific content. Subscription-base journals, editorial rejection and scrupulous peer review have to be made obsolete because they only ...


4

This is a terrible question, because it presumes that publications are the goal of science, as opposed to an indicator of actual meaningful intellectual contribution. Therefore, I will provide a solution that proves the metrics are meaningless per se: Generate a sequence of N meaningless papers using Sci-Gen. Have each of the meaningless papers cite K of ...


3

If Academia was a game, and if the winning rule was to maximize one's number of publications (which I don't think it is, but which the administrators of some institutions seem to believe), I think that the following strategies would make sense: Focus on Research :: Abandon all attempts to personal life (and good teaching) and dedicate your life to ...


-1

Answer to the question: no it is not plagiarism. Plagiarism is defined as passing off someone else's text, idea, representation as your own. As the author in question is actually the author of the old paper, it is not plagiarized. If the author signed over the exclusive copyright, it is a copyright violation. If your conference requires contributions to ...


2

It doesn't really matter. Adopt the style that the journal or conference you are submitting to seems to prefer if there are no instructions given by the venue.


-1

As others have noted, this is a lot of copying, and it would be difficult to justify, but I would say that it is not by itself unacceptable. Ultimately, it boils down not to how much of the paper is replicated, but to how much of the result is replicated. If it just happens that for this problem, describing the preliminaries takes up 1.5 pages, and they've ...


1

Here's a version that focuses on making the proof watertight for legal matters not publicly revealing the content (which follows from the double-blind requirement) The legally provable way of time-stamping something (and also to legally prove the state it was in at that time) is to have a notary attest it, and/or give a copy to the notary for keeping ...


1

Honestly, I think that keywords are now de facto irrelevant. The issue is this: when was the last time that you actually searched for a paper by keyword? In practice, literature discovery is now more typically done by means of modern search engines, which will generally disregard such minor distinctions as singular vs. plurals in any case.


16

Yeah, copying 25% of a prior paper without attribution is definitely self-plagiarism. Report it to the program chairs of the conference, and let them sort out how to manage the problem from there. Additional information, for any coming from different publication cultures: electrical engineering / computer science conferences are serious publications that ...


11

Speaking as an editor: one of the reasons that many journals have a large pool of associate editors (in addition to spreading the load), is to avoid disqualifying editors from publishing. This is particularly important for field-specific journals with all-volunteer editing, as otherwise you would lose some of the important contributors and also discourage ...


2

Not numerical data, but the Retraction Watch blog reports on retracted papers in the academic literature, including many papers retracted because they are wrong.


2

"Most cited papers" in a given field/period is fairly easy through something like Web of Knowledge; it's a few clicks to find out that both Scopus and Web of Knowledge list this as the most cited paper in chemistry in 2014, for example. (Tellingly, they only agree on three of the top five...) Doing this for authors is more challenging, though - the Google ...


10

You will find that the pool of reviewers for many journals comes from its recent submitters. I have often gotten a review request from an editor shortly after submitting an article of my own. It's very common and not unethical. Peer review is driven by this back and forth between reviewers and submitters.


16

Your question is really two: reviewers and editorial board members. Reviewers are peers reviewing other peers papers, or put differently and in very general terms, everyone reviews each other's manuscripts. Reviewers are not a professional occupation tied to a journal. This means that a reviewer is just as much welcome as an author as the author who was ...


1

Traditional, subscription-based publishing, with self-archival of pre-prints, works well. That is probably the major reason why other models stay confidential, or are plagued with dishonest behavior (like author-pay, "gold" OA). The other aspect is that such initiatives are typically pet projects driven by a few enthusiastic individuals. Sometimes their ...


0

That would depend on the rights you might have signed over. Normally for conference which do not publish special issues of journals, you as the author retain the right to publish the paper in a journal. However, make sure you mention this history to the editor. And if the paper or abstract can be found online associated with the conference, mention it on the ...


6

In general, all papers tell a story: "Here's this important problem. Here's what's been done about it. But what we don't know is X, Y, Z. So here in this paper, I address X, Y, and Z." Do your best to frame your introduction to acknowledge this previous paper in the "here's what's been done about it" section, and set up your novel 20% as the "X, Y, Z". ...


5

A good survey can be found in this article. In short: within approximately the last 5 years, large international collaborations have started to exceed 1000 authors per paper. The largest authorship papers are all LHC papers at present (with 3000+ authors), but other collaborations, particularly in biomedicine, may top that in the future.


-6

When a person lands on your article, the first thing you have focus is keep him engaged. So basically what these guys are trying to do is, give a brief introduction about what the entire story is about. If the intro/ summary is pretty good then people will continue reading. It's more like bounce rate when it comes to websites/ digital world. People ...


18

It's not plagarism to come to similar conclusions to someone else, as long as you're open and honest about everything plagarism isn't the issue. Since you know about it you'd definitely have to cite it. As long as you don't claim to be the first to have discovered it then citing the earlier paper and confirming that you found similar results before ...


34

First of all, you are absolutely right that you need to cite the paper. Citations should not be to "previous work you based your work on" but to "the state of the art" - whether or not you explicitly based your work on a previous article. The reader should be able to place your work in the context of what is already known on a topic. Second, giving any ...


2

Some publishers have a page introducing the ways by which their readers can be informed whenever a new issue of the journal is published, or a new paper is published in a journal. You should seek each journal for such email subscriptions. Also, some websites of the journals provide RSS links for their users. You can copy the RSS link (news feed) of the ...


10

I'll (cautiously) agree that this summary may be superfluous. In the best of all possible worlds, this exact information should be in the manuscript's abstract, which is at the editor's fingertips when he reads the review and makes a decision on the manuscript. Sometimes, rarely, I find myself in this best of all possible worlds and find that I can't ...


63

Reviews are communications to the editor, and an effective review tells the editor what the article is about (in that reviewer's opinion), using significantly fewer words than authors typically use. If an editor has to process a couple hundred submissions per year, it's not possible for him/her to carefully read every paper, so the editor will especially ...


33

I always start my reviews with a summary, as a way of establishing that I have understood the key ideas of the paper. I feel that this then places me on firmer ground in any subsequent praise or criticism.


4

Most journal offer an email alert service for new issues/accepted papers. A couple of examples : https://www.aeaweb.org/notify/ http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/10.1111/%28ISSN%291468-0262 (see "Get new content alert") http://www.journals.elsevier.com/journal-of-economic-theory/ (see "Stay up to date")


2

Checking on IEEE Xplore, it certainly appears to be a real conference, and if you search for it on plain Google Scholar (rather than Scholar metrics), you do find publications from it. Scholar Metrics has a much tighter filter than general Scholar, and even some significant conferences don't show up in whatever arbitrary black-box algorithm Google uses to ...


2

One possibility to put this to an end would be to submit to another journal by an e-mail where you would explain the situation (the paper has been submitted elsewhere, you withdrew it when you realized it was not handled properly, and you got no acknowledgment of this withdrawal), and with a CC to the editor-in-chief of the first journal. That way, the ...


0

I happened to have recently gone through most of this process with EES in the past few months and can provide my actual timeline (but not done yet!), for what it's worth: Submitted to Journal: Day 0 Editor Invited (Conditional - this step may not occur): N/A With Editor: Day 2 Under Review: Day 14 Required Reviews Complete: Day 44, revisions were then ...


5

I think a good general rule of thumb, when you don't know the authors in question, is when you've convinced yourself you can understand some piece of the paper (or resolve an apparent contradiction) with your current resources. Once this is the case, try to craft a simple, brief and direct email which addresses the primary issue(s). Then sleep on it before ...


15

There is wrong on every side of this situation. First, a journal demanding money for withdrawing a paper is suspicious in the extreme. I have never in my life heard of such a practice from a legitimate journal, which means that you were probably duped into submitting to a predatory (junk) publisher. If this is the case, you should definitely withdraw the ...


13

As already stated in a comment, sending the same paper to two journals is just plain wrong and you are likely violating the journal agreements you agreed to when submitting them. So never ever do this again! As for picking the journal with highest impact, well that seems like a fair choice but I wonder what the journal editors would say if they knew the ...



Top 50 recent answers are included