I am funded by the university for my PhD, though I had approached the supervisor myself, particularly because he had decent publications in good journals. I am an international student. I have finished exactly 1.5 years of my PhD and my funding is only for 3 years. I am working on an Artificial Intelligence/Machine Learning problem.
I work on a topic which is more academically exciting than of much use to industry. I did not know that before I started my PhD. Let is call this area A. I confess that I was told I will be working on this area. Though I must mention that along with A, B is another topic which was mentioned and I am working on both, though A is where my supervisors "specialize".
Now my problem: 1. A is not really going to get me a job as a respected scientist in industry after my PhD. So I MUST consider A with other ideas from other popular methods -- and I take the burden to prove that my idea is correct.
A has been overused in my group and I am already getting reviews for my paper that it is very similar to other works from this group. I get to believe that I am doing a shadow PhD in previous student's work who has graduated with "flying colors".
I am not a fan of A myself, particularly because it lacks mathematical foundation and my supervisors have no intention of letting me pursue such a direction, nor are they capable of providing me guidance in this area.
I am not looking for an academic career, but wish to be a researcher in industry. So I need to make my research relevant.
Now, when I approach my supervisors (three of them, one of them added by my primary without even asking me, to help him!) telling them that I want to work in B more than A, and also wish to include C in my research I am met with stiff resistance. The argument being this is not relevant to the conferences in A. If presented in a conference of C, people will ask too many questions etc. I would appreciate a proper discussion in being shown that C is not technically useful or viable or something like that.
This clearly is not scientific research. So I am considering raising this issue in my half-monthly report. But this will surely make the supervisors work against me and they would naturally not provide help whenever they are required to. What are your suggestions?
Note: My supervisor has friends in all the journals and conferences he publishes. He does not send a paper to a new conference where he has no friends!