Timeline for PhD students publish without supervisors – how does it work?

Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0

7 events

when toggle format	what		by	license	comment
S Dec 15, 2021 at 14:33	history	suggested	user98721	CC BY-SA 4.0	Corrected typo
Dec 15, 2021 at 13:08	review	Suggested edits
S Dec 15, 2021 at 14:33
May 5, 2021 at 11:43	comment	added	Ian Sudbery		In biology, a paper doesn't make it into nature/science/cell unless it either solves an existing problem recognized to be important, or identifies a new problem, convinces people it is important AND solves.it. This second is more common because most easy ways to solve existing problems have been tried, but there are an almost infinite number of problems that could be interesting with easy solutions that have not yet been tried.
May 3, 2021 at 22:26	vote	accept	sleepy
May 2, 2021 at 10:48	comment	added	Wrzlprmft♦		most leading mathematicians get their status by convincing the community that the problems they can solve are important, not by solving problems that were considered important beforehand. – This is not so much different from other fields (including most of physics). The difference seems to be that finding some task that is important and arguing that it is is considered a major part of the creative work and happens in the papers.
May 1, 2021 at 20:53	comment	added	sleepy		Thank you! very interesting comparison. When asking my question, I was indeed thinking about mathematics as a field where this should be more common. I do understand that when supervising a student, you might not be interested in a publication as much as in "creating" a new researcher with a similar mindset (i.e. having interest in your problems) because this would be sort of an investment in your future. Yet, this does not exclude co-authorship, so I suppose traditions in mathematics also play a role here.
May 1, 2021 at 20:32	history	answered	Alexander Woo	CC BY-SA 4.0