New answers tagged

1

Quick answer: there should be no problem at all. More details: There are three potential issues involved, none of which is usually a serious problem: Plagiarism: If you (or your coauthors) are the author of the original protocol, then there is no plagiarism involved. But see the next point… Multiple submission (often misleadingly called "self-...


1

Surely you can reuse any source (whether public or not), and you have to cite the original and quote the parts you use verbatim. If you don't cite or don't quote properly, it would be plagiarism or a violation of copyright or both. Whether your modifications together with the remainder of your manuscript have so much value that they justify the acceptance of ...


2

Think about it from the point of view of the editor - they often have several manuscripts on hand, and they're also working full-time on another job. So they might not look at your manuscript for a long time. If you nudge them, then they'll look at your manuscript. They'll wonder if they should, e.g., nudge the reviewer too, or if the revisions are actually ...


6

A period of 40 days with a referee is not excessive, even for minor revisions. You can contact the editor if you wish, but it is not clear to me why your preference for faster progress is their problem. If you can explain some compelling reason for needing your publication fast-tracked (ideally one that is sufficiently unusual that it gives good cause for ...


0

Contact potential co-authors at the beginning of the project Firstly, it is great that you are thinking about this --- too many people start projects like this without thinking about the credit they ought to give to other contributors. To avoid getting into a mess, or an authorship dispute, I recommend you take the time to contact relevant contributors and ...


3

Authorship in academia does not literally mean "writing the paper". Authorship means: having made contributions to the research (how large a contribution needs to be for authorship depends on the field) having read and agreed with the contents of the publication From a purely academic standpoint, your ex-colleague should at least be a co-author ...


1

The best people to comment on this are your colleagues or your advisor(if any). A paper gets published in a reputed journal only when it has publishable material. So unless and until you show your work to your peers(or your coauthors), you are not sure if the output of the experiment is publishable or not. Also it depends on where you would like to publish ...


1

In an informal conversation you are probably fine, but for anything formal, make it more accurate that you were "an" author, not "the" author. Don't leave an improper impression for anything important. But it is probably better if you qualify it always. "I'm an author of a paper that discusses/settles..." It is only a few extra ...


2

While copyright law varies, I suspect that you can't do that unless you have specific permission from the copyright holder. That is probably whoever published your work initially. Publishers usually detail what license they grant back to authors, so you can look to that for guidance. To do more requires explicit permission. But it also requires care in ...


2

Finish an acceptable version of your paper as soon as possible and send it to arXiv. If it appears within a few days/weeks of the other paper it may be considered simultaneous. That version can be imperfect, you can improve it later, just make sure there are no major flaws. Cite the other paper while explaining the relation to your paper. Something like: &...


6

The author of this book has not uploaded any full text of the book to ResearchGate, so no one can read it there. You can ask the authors for a full text by clicking on "Request full text", but there is no guarantee that they will honor that request (especially for a book which is being sold on the market). If a full text is available on ...


2

This is a very old question. I would like to add that in my experience, this is actually quite a common occurrence in mathematics, counter to the belief of the previous answer. It's not usually that Famous Mathematician E whispered their conjecture into the ear of Professor S in secret. Rather, that Famous Mathematician E (potentially in an informal context, ...


2

For purposes of the paper your affiliation is probably independent researcher. The university you are about to join provided no support for the paper nor would it acknowledge your relationship to them at the time. The professor's university would need to acknowledge you as being affiliated with them if you want to list them, but this seems unlikely. It would ...


12

I'm not in agreement with the other answer here, which suggests that these are red-flags for such a lack of merit as to amount to "crankery". It's possible that this is the problem, but there are other possibilities too. The fact that the journals rejecting your paper are offering to transfer them elsewhere suggests to me that your paper probably ...


26

I would respectfully point out that your post has a few "red flags" for what we in the business call "crankery." My...paper is being rejected..without undergoing peer review. However, every rejection explicitly states that there is no technical error in my line of reasoning and so far none have questioned the relevance and novelty of my ...


9

Remind them of the previous communications and insist that you already withdrew the paper. Provide copies if possible, with dates. No, it isn't a duplicate publication, but make sure they understand that their "acceptance" is moot. It isn't required that your withdrawal be acknowledged for it to take effect since the rights to the paper are/were ...


9

You can do this (but doing it well requires experience) If you were an experienced researcher, rather than a PhD student, I would say that you should certainly revise in the way you think makes the paper better. Since the paper has not yet been accepted, you are free to revise it in any way you think will improve it. This includes making revisions that ...


12

I realized that my first draft from a few months ago is badly organized and poorly written. I think there is a fine line to be drawn here. Based only on your description, I do not think that this is the appropriate time to reorganize your paper, as your advisor said, parts of the manuscript that the reviewers did not raise questions about proved to have ...


7

Yes, it is legal. The paper is yours until you give up copyright to it. I think your advisor may be worried about the consequences if reviewers don't think your changes are actually improvements. Or worse, make the paper less publishable. But since you were already asked for major changes I think the risk is small if you do a bigger revision. It might, ...


5

Some of your assumptions are wrong: As a graduate student, I know I cannot publish without my mentor's support. There is a difference between not having your mentor's support and not having them as a coauthor. From they way you describe the interactions with your mentor they are very much supportive of you publishing this paper. They just feels that they ...


1

You could consider to add a footnote to your name stating that you are the corresponding author, and still include the name of your supervisor on the paper (if they agree). Detailed answer: In the life sciences, the first author is usually the one who did most of the experimental research and analyses, and (usually) also most of the writing. The last author ...


2

Yes. Editorial changes are always possible as long as they do not affect the interpretation of things. So if the number you previously had was crucial to the interpretation of the experiment -- for example, if you stated that the temperature at which a material becomes superconducting was 280K -- then you probably shouldn't change it when you realized that ...


2

The situation of transferring copyright over material which is already licensed under a Creative Commons license is very common in mathematics, where papers almost always get uploaded to arXiv before they are accepted to a journal. The publishers are aware of this, and the copyright transfer agreement will typically list a series of standard exceptions to ...


-1

If you give a license you don't hold unrestricted copyright any more since you have yielded some rights. You can only give rights you hold. If you license something under CC as you suggest, then I have some rights to use it that you can't withdraw. You can yield any and all of your remaining rights to the publisher or anyone else. So, the situation is ...


3

With hindsight, did I do the right thing to discourage this practice of irrelevant self-citation Not necessarily. Citation is not a prize or a favour. It's a scientific tool to help the reader or to justify the claims. Therefore, it is certainly right to discourage the practice of irrelevant citations. But if your concern is only irrelevant self-citation, ...


0

You don't monitor. You let them do. It looks unfair, and yes it has negative consequences on researchers morale, though no matter the amount of self-citations and citations obtained on the shoulders of other researchers work, only due to having placed their name on others papers they haven't read, they will not get anywhere near the number of citations of ...


2

First of all, it is helpful to realise that the VG Wort is all about monetizing secondary use (“Zweitverwertung”) of creative works, i.e., lawfully permitted uses of works, e.g., copying for teaching. This is opposed to primary use such as a journal selling a copy of an issue to a library or a single paper to a reader. Secondary use is almost inherently ...


-2

I will contribute an answer for the worst case scenario, in which you quit your PhD with a bit of bad blood with your former PhD advisor. I presume that otherwise you wouldn't even be asking that question. The contributions by your PhD advisor would not suffice for their co-authorship if you were senior academics on equal level. If you are a PhD student in ...


4

This will be harder during the COVID-19 pandemic, but the prior strategy was to submit papers to conferences, go and present them, and then go to see other talks and meet people who share your interests. Now that so many conferences are virtual or hybrid, you’re going to have to get creative, but so is everyone else. Something on SE, FB, TikTok, or the like ...


14

The stuff that you list all falls into "advising research students", and in mathematics mere advising tasks are generally not considered to merit co-authorship. As such, a single-author paper is a reasonable outcome. On the other hand, just running with the idea communicated to you in person by your advisor on your own might be a bit rude. Checking ...


-4

I think you are asking the wrong question. Without an academic affiliatuon getting accepted for publication will not be easy. You may want to contact your professor for this reason.


-2

Yes, it would be inappropriate to finish and publish this on your own. You should contact your former advisor: they should probably be offered authorship of a resulting paper. If they decline (a realistic possibility) you are free to continue on your own. Also, their help may prove valuable. Having somone experienced to check and improve the paper before ...


1

Why don’t you message him here on SE something short and ask him if this question is something he’d like to pursue with you as a research project? You know he follows his account here to some extent. Nothing longer than a few lines.


2

I wouldn't recommend using search to dump all of someone's database. This can easily be considered rude or abusive behavior. Maybe not as serious as the example I'm about to give, but as a thought experiment I'm thinking about how printing at schools I attended pre-university was free of charge. I'd expect no trouble to photocopy a few pages for an essay I ...


4

Published texts are virtually never 100% error-free. If it happens, it's because all the people involved proofread it very, very carefully. For illustration, I once edited a book where the author's wife said she'll proofread the manuscript again and again until she can't find any more errors. She (and me) carefully checked all the proofs at every stage, and ...


0

When error free things appear in print it is, often enough, a combination of blind luck along with many eyes. The luck part should be clear. The many eyes means that several people have reviewed the work with an "eye" toward corrections. The different people have different concerns. Content reviewers are looking for errors of meaning. But copy ...


0

First off, if reviewers do not understand your paper, either the editorial staff or the journal has done a piss poor job of allocating a reviewer to review your work or your paper is subpar in putting its point across. While the former is also a possibility, it seldom is in reputable journals. Since everyone here is talking a shot at you (author), let me ...


1

I think the question in the title has been answered by others on this and past threads. I think it's worth noting that if the paper has sat on your advisors desk, then it is already somewhat implicit that they will be a coauthor on the paper. Thus, acting unilaterally to post the paper to a preprint server and/or trying to publish it yourself might be viewed ...


0

In general it is very good for students to publish single-authored papers. If you later apply for a position, people studying your application will not have to wonder which part of the work you did. Your advisor's career might benefit marginally from being a coauthor, but it also benefits from your academic success. So even a selfish, unethical advisor ...


2

It depends. There are no rules, but you need to make sure that your paper follows a logical order and is easy to understand for the reader. The reader wants to see that any conclusions you draw logically result from the measurements or calculations. This often leads to the main result being presented at the end, but that has never been a requirement or ...


2

Ethically, if the intellectual content of the paper is yours you can publish it as a sole author. You need to acknowledge the help you get that doesn't rise to the level of authorship. However, in some fields, it is difficult to separate the "contributions" of people like advisors who provide an environment in which the work can be done and which ...


1

I've found it useful to use large ringed binders for papers. One binder per project/subject is usually sufficient, though you might sometimes have to use two. This works well if you can separate your papers into groups based on subject area or project, but you might need to double-up papers in some cases (i.e., have more than one printed copy of a paper). ...


5

As suggested in comments, use a filing cabinet, ideally with hanging file folders that require no punch holes. But don't mix physical location and semantic organisation. This would be highly inflexible. Do this instead: Note down a running number or date on each hardcopy. This is the call number of your hardcopy.* Now write down a range of numbers or dates ...


1

Let me preface this by saying I am not a lawyer, and everything I say is just my interpretation of the license they give based on my experience with open source software licensing. First of all, you have to look at what is being licensed. In the license term you posted (which is term 3), it is referring to "Website Content" as being under the CC-NC-...


3

I used to use a piling system - it works great until you have to move office, and the piles are all in new places. Also, putting things on top of each other makes it awkward to pull out those further down the heap. Filing cabinets were invented for a reason, and work really well ... again, until you have to move. Which may be quite often if you are still a ...


1

This won't be flattering to your field, but no reflection on you is implied. If your field sort of expects that no one in the lab does anything meaningful except the PI and everyone else just basks in the glory, then choose last author. I'd be surprised, however, that you are permitted to do this if you work for a PI. If your field sort of expects that the ...


0

In terms of academic integrity, if you: created a graphic yourself using a software tool then you would not cite the software tool. For example, if you prepared your paper in Microsoft Word, possibly using the drawing tools, you would not cite Word or give Microsoft credit.


6

It sounds to me like you're saying it's a simple mixup that anyone reading the paper can correct with no bearing on the paper's overall results. If that's true, then you should just ignore it. If you need the equation in your work, you can make the necessary correction and put in a footnote that there was a typo in the original. I expect that, on average, ...


2

When I referee, I note who the authors are for one reason only: to check for self-plagiarism. Should I worry about my previous publication record when I try to communicate my research paper in a top journal? No. Do the referees give think it is less important or become skeptical of the work of an unestablished researcher? Good referees do not care. In ...


5

In general it seems discourteous to nag the author, who may be discomfited by your discovery and may be seeking to check and correct. Nevertheless, it seems odd they have not acknowledged your communication so one more query about its receipt may be justified. If you have not received satisfactory reply after a couple of months it would be reasonable to ask ...


Top 50 recent answers are included