61

At least in my field, Acknowledgements are generally regarded a fairly informal mechanism. There are few rules dictating what must and mustn't go in there. However, given that mentions in the acknowledgements don't dilute formal credit, I see no reason not to be as generous, gratuitous and grateful as possible in an acknowledgements section. Its not like ...


19

(Disclosure: I review for MathSciNet.) how much of the responsibility lies on the MathSciNet reviewer who "validated" the proof? In my view, very little if any, and by using the word "validate" I think you overstate the case. Reviewing for MathSciNet is not meant to be like refereeing, and reviewers are definitely not asked to check the correctness of ...


13

how much of the responsibility lies on the MathSciNet reviewer who "validated" the proof? None. The instructions for reviewers don't ask the reviewer to check the validity of the proofs; by a time a paper gets to MathSciNet it has been peer reviewed already. The purpose of a MathSciNet review is to explain what's in the paper and why someone might want to ...


11

It is very unlikely for the paper to be rejected solely for the reason of the missing cover letter. It is highly likely that you are going to be contacted (using an automated system or personal email) about an incomplete submission or the submission process itself will continue without the cover letter at all. I would say, missing a cover letter might ...


6

It is doubtful that they would reject it out of hand, but possible they won't process it as an incomplete submission. If the submission was through an online system, see if you can update your submission. You might also contact the editor directly and ask for advice, providing you can get contact information. But, failing that, I suspect that it will be ...


5

What are the consequences if I don't acknowledge the company. You just burn bridges if you do that (you basically behave socially wrongly). For future conferences, it will hurt your professional reputation FWIW, any European funded H2020 project contractually requires such an acknowledgement (at least in some footnote). AFAIK, NSF or NASA or ESA funding -...


4

As usual, the true (but not very useful) answer is: it depends. I typically come across that section when the article describes an experiment. Experiments typically involve quite an abstraction from the real world, which is why they can keep so much under control. However, this also means that one could question whether what one found in the abstract ...


4

That certainly means that this material is not ready for publication. No matter when the error (is it even an error?) was made (in the initial or subsequent experiment), one first has to figure out why the results are the way they are. From some angle, it is even a blessing that the results are mismatched: it forced to "bake the research" a little longer ...


3

I suppose the alphabetical order is in favour of the supervisor. Unfortunately, if the excuse is indeed valid for the field you cannot do much. You can try and challenge it based on the practices of target journals, but you should be prepared for some confrontation. An informal convention in many fields is that the PhD student gets to be the first author ...


3

To get the ISSN of a paper by using the paper's DOI, try CrossRef's API. Specifically, use the URL https://api.crossref.org/works/ and add the DOI to it. For example, if the DOI is 10.1177/0047117819856397, then use the URL https://api.crossref.org/works/10.1177/0047117819856397 There is a branch called "ISSN" in that JSON-file. If the output looks ...


3

Well, this happened to me recently. After 2.5 months of reviewer hunting, the editor-in-chief failed to find any reviewer and rejected my manuscript. The funny thing is that during this last 2.5 months, I inquired about the status of the manuscript thrice through the manuscript submission system and also emailed the editor-in-chief at his persona email. I ...


3

So my question is: how much of the responsibility lies on the MathSciNet reviewer who "validated" the proof? My understanding is that it is their duty to reveal the mistakes in the published article, so that the other authors do not base their work on it. Is there a way to "nudge" the reviewer to make amends to the review? None. Unlike what your title ...


2

Pragmatically speaking, you have nothing to lose! I don't think it's wrong, either, as your situation seems unusual. So the clear advice would be to send the email. However, to maximize the chance that this is effective, I do think you should be clear that this is an extraordinary request. Don't expect or demand that they will be able to grant it, and be ...


2

Hi thanks for all the comments! I asked the author on Twitter and it turns out the he uses Keynote to make those diagrams, and not some obscure library written in python or TeX.


2

Scientific American is a very different type of journal, in fact it more a "magazine" than a peer-reviewed academic journal like Nature. Nature (and almost all other paid-subscription academic journals) does not want people downloading large numbers of articles at a time, even if they are doing it legally (with a paid subscription, such as yourself). This ...


2

This may depend on the field, but to me the phrase "the descriptive information of main variables and item pool characteristics" is utterly unclear. If you don't want to spell out the full set of descriptive statistical operators you use, consider including something like: "Our exogenous variables encompass [...] summary statistics over the main variables". ...


2

If you log into the target journal in IEEE, go to your author center, and click on "start a new submission". On the next page, click the button "Begin Submission". Click on "Step 3: Attributes". This will show you what keywords are required, and how many (look for the "required : X. Max Y") to the right of the Keyword entry. IEEE seems to require between 1 ...


2

I'd like to add to the so far excellent answers: Increases the reputation of the company, because they contributed to your research - even if you think in this case it wasn't much. Increases the reputation of the field, because the paper shows there is interest for it in the private sector. This might not be important in this subject, but a lot of fields ...


2

The good will of your advisor is more important, I think, that fighting for a minor issue over one paper. Hopefully this isn't your last or best paper. If alphabetical is acceptable in your field then let it go. You could fight it to the death, of course, but it would be you that is more wounded than your professor if you don't get a good letter to boost ...


1

It is difficult to tell without knowing the nature of the experiment. If you are using simulated data, discrepancies are normal. Perhaps both runs are correct but some simulated values caused the results to diverge greatly. Also, there may be a mistake or inadvertent change the second time. Perhaps both runs are correct or perhaps both are false and you need ...


1

You could do that, but then you wouldn't be doing a comparative study anymore. You would, in effect, be comparing one thing you created with something else that you modified. It would bring your comparison into doubt even if it didn't invalidate it. Report that your tool produces X and tool A produces no result for such cases. That is a valid comparison. ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible