Timeline for Very few research groups: continue doing PhD in this area?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
11 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 5, 2013 at 3:00 | review | Community Evaluations | |||
| Jun 13, 2013 at 3:00 | |||||
| Apr 9, 2013 at 8:58 | vote | accept | Orion | ||
| Apr 9, 2013 at 8:58 | vote | accept | Orion | ||
| Apr 9, 2013 at 8:58 | |||||
| Apr 9, 2013 at 7:38 | answer | added | Piotr Migdal | timeline score: 3 | |
| Apr 8, 2013 at 20:18 | answer | added | walkmanyi | timeline score: 7 | |
| Apr 8, 2013 at 19:55 | history | tweeted | twitter.com/#!/StackAcademia/status/321350631531102210 | ||
| Apr 8, 2013 at 19:49 | comment | added | Orion | Well. I think it is better to do my a PhD in an "active research area". But how is this determined? Basically by the amount of related literature. However, my supervisor advised me to check how many research groups (and dedicated conferences) are actively working in my research area. Actually there are only few research groups, but several professional ones. | |
| Apr 8, 2013 at 19:06 | comment | added | cartonn | I guess it might help to specify some more details.. | |
| Apr 8, 2013 at 17:19 | history | edited | F'x | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 4 characters in body
|
| Apr 8, 2013 at 16:02 | review | First posts | |||
| Apr 8, 2013 at 16:03 | |||||
| Apr 8, 2013 at 15:43 | history | asked | Orion | CC BY-SA 3.0 |