35

There is no general rule. Different authors have different opinions about this. To my knowledge no mathematics journal has guidelines about this sort of thing. A rule of thumb could be that if your notation is going to be used throughout the paper, then it should be introduced at the beginning in a special section called "notations", "conventions", "...


27

My personal opinion is no, editing at that level is not sufficient. One can peruse guidelines for your field. Taking Nature as one fairly broad journal, they state: Each author is expected to have made substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work; or the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data; or the creation of new ...


19

What you should prioritize in any paper, mathematics or otherwise, is readability. Organize the paper so that your reader can comfortably follow your argument without a lot of jumping around. In a short, relatively "flat" paper, almost any organization will probably be ok. Flat in the sense of later parts not depending fundamentally on earlier parts. But ...


6

No, grammatical corrections do not constitute authorship level involvement with the paper. Some other things (in math) that usually don't constitute authorship: Suggesting an example of some interesting behaviour related to a definition or theorem. Suggesting a better way to write a proof. Pointing out small mathematical mistakes and how to fix them (e.g. ...


5

What makes this question challenging to answer is that it’s addressing the wrong level of generality: you’re asking about a very specific situation (publishing a simpler proof of a known result) but your questions suggest you’re missing basic facts about publishing of math research in general (how to “address an editor”, how to select a journal to send your ...


4

Everything you write in a paper should be the answer to the question that is in the reader's mind at that point. So the title needs to answer the question: "Do I bother with this at all?". The abstract, as @user119516 says, answers "do I glance at this?", and the introduction answers "do I read this?". If you follow that principle then it is obvious that ...


4

First, this is not an unusual situation. What is unusual here is your interpretation of the situation. When you have a problem with someone's behavior, it is wise to look for incompetence instead of malice. It's highly likely the professor intended to keep his promises but failed to do so. You have given us no evidence otherwise. Professors commonly ...


3

In many, but not all IEEE publications, the hard limit implies that if the paper is larger than N pages, every (N+1)th page is charged with an overlength charge. See this page on IEEE Author Center, which also contains the fresh link to a PDF with current prices (overlength, open-access, color). Usually, IEEE Transactions on XXX will allow publishing papers ...


3

Tl;dr: Put (published) conferences papers that are subsequently published as journal articles in both sections of your CV. A journal article is a publication, as is a conference paper, regardless of whether the article was derived from the paper. Each publication is a contribution to science, so list both on your CV, they're both accomplishments. You can ...


3

In order to get a clickable link in an author's name in Google Scholar results, three main conditions must be met: The author must have created a public profile in Google Scholar. The profile must be verified with an academic email account. The profile must be up to date (only documents that have been added to the profile will appear with a link to the ...


2

New proofs are valued in mathematics if they open new doors. But the proof probably needs to be something that has value in its own right, though there are exceptions. A short proof of the four color theorem that doesn't rely on computers would be interesting, even without the "new doors" aspects. (I hope that is still the case. I haven't looked at it in a ...


2

In most cases when you get an editorial/referee comment that is a misunderstanding of the paper, it behooves you to add something in the paper to address this possible misunderstanding. The fact that you have already added a footnote dealing with the matter, and this is insufficient, means you will have to consider expanding this to a larger explanation in ...


1

"A direct proof of Cockatoo's equation." "An elementary approach to Shrokensveny and Ljubovitch's inequalities" "Deriving the circumferent super-Galois hyperextension of Williamson spaces from basic topological axioms" Simplified proofs are amongst the most valuables contributions to mathematics if they convey either new perspectives, or clarity or ...


1

Make it into two - part 1 and part 2, gives you more pages in total as well. There are often papers published that have “subsequent” papers. An example: part 1 is method with some preliminary results, part 2 further results, analysis & conclusions.


1

Workshops are usually for new topics, and I do rank them lower than conferences. Moreover, workshops usually publish/accept papers rejected from their co-located main conference; often than not, they are used to prop up the number of registrations or to cover the cost of the main conference. Also, because they are new, it is usually very easy to get a paper ...


1

If it does not need to be pure PHP there is a javascript library: Citation.js https://citation.js.org/ it allows you to convert information from one format into another. Maybe it fits your specific usecase.


1

For Crossref DOIs (110 million+) there's a public API - https://api.crossref.org/ that returns JSON


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