Consider the concept of opportunity cost.
There are two possible situations:
I program everything, do the evaluation with a benchmark, tell nobody, write everything and publish alone.
I program everything, do the evaluation with a benchmark, write something and publish with four other authors, that mostly write the paper.
What should I do?
To answer your possible questions:
- They are not going to program, no matter what, so that doesn't help to save any time.
- Publishing without telling them anything may be perceived in a suspicious way, specially by external reviewers and considering there may be past papers in which I wasn't alone.
- It may also be perceived as if I'm not a good team player, which worries me, as finding a new job may be harder due to this.
- The order of the authors is alphabetical, and I'm not lucky in that sense.
- They are more reputed than me.
PD: the original idea for the paper either comes from me or it comes from someone else. The implementation is always my task. At this very moment I could refine one of those ideas and improve it (the previous version is submitted but not reviewed). I'm very confused about how to proceed.
PD: I am a postdoc now but I am a PhD in a different institution (I haven't defended my thesis, it's nearly finished).