I am currently a post-doc student in computer science. I have worked on one research problem and have got small results. I am doing this work independently so my current supervisor is not giving any feedback. I am worried should I wait for more results or just go with results that I have in my hand. My question is should I wait for more results or first submit a paper with small results and then keep working on the problem and then after that if I have a further results then I can also try to publish in the extended form.

Question : Publishing something in incremental way or as a single paper by waiting for more time?

  • @old - Can you expand that comment into an answer?
    – eykanal
    Jul 3, 2018 at 15:06

1 Answer 1


Publishing incrementally gives you more feedback from peers as you go. Publishing in a "big bang" way makes preemption more likely since it takes you more time. It would be awful to spend years on a magnum opus only to be beaten to publication by someone else.

However, your incremental results should be significant enough that they stand on their own. You don't want to get the reputation of publishing trivia.

The best of all worlds is that you publish a series of important, if small results, that build to the crescendo with the big bang.

You can also, perhaps, depending on your position, use small (but meaningful) results to introduce newer students to your research and to build a core of researchers in your topic.

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .