New answers tagged

0

Here is my approach (pure math): I consider a paper ready for submission when I personally am completely convinced of it's correctness. If I only think, "it's probably okay", that's not good enough. That said, I do put more effort into verifying central statements than tangential asides. When possible, I try to cross-check my results in ...


2

If the scholarship indirectly gives you the opportunity to conduct the research, for example by freeing up time that may otherwise be spent in a part time job, it would seem appropriate to acknowledge it. It might depend on the level of unrelated, an undergraduate research project in your university (yes) vs a community project litter picking (no). Still, ...


-1

Perspective of a recent PhD student here: You learn to make papers "better" by writing papers. And by "better" here I mean useful to your audience. The goal of academic writing is not to create perfect piece of text that will stay valid forever, but to help others and to move the scientific discussion forward. You can do it even when you ...


0

(As far as I know) If the scholarship is unrelated to the study you are trying to publish, you do not have to acknowledge the funding source/scholarship.


2

Assume the perspective of a Reviewer. As a Reviewer, I will never reject a paper because of "mere" typos unless: they make the paper unredable. But this happens when the author(s) spend no time in spellchecking, or have very little English writing expertise (and both of these are different problems) they are still widely present after the first ...


5

In addition to typos-versus-flawed-proofs, there is another distinction worth making, I think. Namely, some proofs really are (perhaps) delicate computations (or other intensely symbolic lines of reasoning), and thus their persuasiveness and believability is already somewhat fragile. For example, her typos are terrible. In some contrast, some written ...


5

Depends on mistakes. If these are crucial mistakes in arguments, you should correct them before submitting the paper. It is doable. Misprints, on the other hand, are not that important and you do not need to catch them all. So to submit your paper you need to be absolutely sure that the arguments are correct. Recently I edited a paper submitted to "my&...


12

Ideally, the desired error number is zero. But as you observe, it is difficult to achieve. One problem is that the author of a paper is probably the least able to proofread it. (Maybe not literally "least", but I hope you get the point.) The reason is that when reading your own work what you "see" on the page is too often what you thought ...


7

I don't know any specifics about Firat University, but I will mention a few points: There are a lot universities in Turkey more reputable than Firat, both private unis and state unis (e.g. state: Bogazici, METU, ITU, Ege, Ankara; private: Koc, Sabanci, Bilkent, Ozyegin, etc.). So I would not put the university to a high standard. State universities in Turkey,...


0

It is similar to job applications. While processes are similar everywhere, getting a job obviously is not. More people will be 'desk rejected' for sure, but even those candidates getting the interview will have a harder time. Scientists writing the review are conscious about the venue. If asked to review for a top journal, established scientists know the ...


4

I had a paper published in a decent niche journal without review at all (there. It got reviews and final verdict of "good content but too niche, reject" at another journal by another publisher). Editor read the paper and decided to publish it straight away, skipping the usual review process. While field is physics and this was the only time it ...


2

Ultimately, the answer is that it is up to the journal editors what they choose to publish. The final decisions about acceptance or rejection are always in the hands of the editorial staff. However, some journals (such as the Physical Review journals) do indeed have a standing policy that they will not publish any research papers without at least one ...


4

My anecdotal impression is that while both phases are important and certainly the top journals have higher rates of desk rejections before review, they also tend to have less editorial leeway for revisions after peer review. The rigor of reviews is the same, which makes sense: ultimately, the actual people doing the reviews are coming from the same pool of &...


19

This is reasonably common. I've had this happen to me as an author and as a reviewer - note that the identity of the reviewer should not shared with anyone without the consent of the reviewer. You should take up this offer if you are resubmitting to a journal clearly lower on the prestige scale. It's not clear what you should do for a journal roughly equal ...


11

This has happened to me once or twice, and is becoming more moderately common in math. My understanding is the main reasons to do this are to: Get a quick turnaround because the reviewer shouldn't take long to re-review it. Save overall refereeing efforts. Taking the journal up on this offer may result in a quick acceptance, or a quick rejection. In my ...


4

I can't advise you what to do, but only point out a few things that might help you make a decision. Keep in mind that a paper can be rejected for a variety of reasons not related to the quality of the paper, though a breakthrough paper wouldn't get such treatment. First, a paper can be rejected if it is out of scope for the journal. It is less likely in a ...


12

In all the mathematics journals I'm acquainted with, the editors' decisions on publication are final, and the referees' opinions are just advisory. So, yes, if an editor wanted to publish a paper despite some negative remarks from referees, that'd be entirely within protocols. Still, I'd think that generally they'd have scant motivation to do so. I'd think ...


34

Yes The ultimate arbiter of what gets published in journals is the editor-in-chief, not any reviewer.


1

It probably would have been better to send to both initially. But since that option isn't open, perhaps you can wait a reasonable time for a reply. But, if the mail was "informational" rather than requesting feedback, then you might not get a reply. But, a week or so is a reasonable wait time. You can also send a follow up, but to both.


9

I had more than 30 math and math ed. papers and books published by the time I was 30. I expect that people in more applied fields usually have more publications. So 30 is not something unusual.


4

Yes, cite it. Note that the form of citation probably isn't critical at the submission stage. By the time the final version of the new paper is being written the conference citation will become fixed. It takes more than two months from submission to final version preparation in the best cases. Depend on the delay and on the fact that edits will almost ...


1

You could do what you suggest, but a simpler solution would be to simply edit the entry in your profile with the correct details (journal name, page numbers, date, etc.). If Google Scholar later creates a separate entry because it did not realize that the two are the same, you can do the merge at that time. If Google Scholar correctly recognizes your paper's ...


1

You can manually add an article to Google Scholar. To add publications, click on the + button and select from the list of the following options: c) Add article manually: If the article cannot be found you can create an entry manually. First choose the publication type at the top of the form then fill in as many fields as possible Then, you can merge the ...


11

Yes, it's possible for someone under 30 to have their name legitimately on 30 publications. Authorship contributions can be relatively minor, and in fields where people work on lots of different projects it could be quite possible. By age 30 one could easily have 10+ years of research experience at different levels of study. One first-authored paper per year ...


13

You can say it in pretty much any format you want provided that you convey the meaning exactly as it is, which, if I understood you correctly is "It is quite possible that method B gives a slightly more general theorem A but the details have not been verified and this generalization is not needed to prove any results that are claimed to be proved in the ...


8

I don't think "conjecture" is exactly the right word for what you have in mind, because that would imply you don't know how to prove it. If I understand the question, you're asking about small improvements that you have convinced yourself you could prove, but aren't important enough to include the full details in the paper. In this case, I usually ...


1

I wrote a paper while visiting xxx on sabbatical; the journal listed xxx as my affiliation. This footnote followed: On sabbatical leave from Bryn Mawr College. Present and permanent address: Department of Mathematics, College II, University of Massachusetts at Boston, Boston, Massachusetts with no email address since this was in the days before email.


1

You could just use a dual affiliation, while providing your current (new) institutional e-mail address if you are the corresponding author (or if all the authors should provide e-mail addresses). If your old institution is paying for all related expenses (publication fees, or conference travel), you may add a footnote or similar saying "The majority of ...


4

If the result is proven to be true (or claimed to be true, ideally in more than one place) by some reliable source(s), you can cite that, especially if the proof would he straightforward. Of course, if the main result of your paper would have relied on this result, you would have to cite a source with a detailed proof or provide one yourself. Otherwise you ...


2

Usually when moving between two institutions I got a "guest appointment" for a few months (normally just to keep e-mail working while I move institutions). You could try and get that at your old place, then list both institutions as your affiliation. I've found that universities will easily hand out guest appointments (as it doesn't cost them ...


2

If they are proved elsewhere, search the references and just cite them. If these statements are new in the sense that the available literature does not contain their proofs, you can state them as conjectures and remember that the validity of your arguments that make use of these conjectures will be subservient to the truth value of these conjectures.


1

I have just gone through this process with the an IEEE publication and TechRxiv. Having 2 revisions before my paper was accepted, these two prints are archived as 2 different versions of the same record, having the same DOI with a versioned suffix. TechRxiv always shows the newest record first. Once your article is published on IEEE Xplore, you can ...


7

If the bulk of the work was done at the old institution, use the old institution and simply add the new institution as a footnote. Thus: Zero the Hero, Tea Department, The Oily Way, [as footnote on title page]: current address: Inner Temple, The Milky Way If the bulk of the work was done at the new institution, then add an acknowledgment: Part of this ...


12

Many journals allow you to include a "current address". If the journal that accepted your paper is one of these, then your affiliation should be your previous institution, where you worked on the paper, and your current address should be your new institution, where people can find you.


2

If you no longer have an actual affiliation with the previous institution, you shouldn't claim that you have. One important use of affiliation is to make it easy for people to find you. However, as you say, you owe them something for their support. An acknowledgement section, or even a footnote, is the place for this. "This work was done as a post-doc ...


3

As @JonCuster comments, you don't provide enough context for a reasonable answer. Is this just something you want to write but haven't started? Do you have fragments or drafts already down on (metaphorical) paper? My experience writing mathematics textbooks is that each one takes me several years, starting with rough notes prepared for a course. I never ...


1

Guessing that it comes to 150 or so pages, but hard to be exact. I was once told (by someone in the "know") that a good writing plan is to "make one page of progress per day". That doesn't mean write one page and then quit for the day, but that your draft is one page longer at the end of each day. It also doesn't mean that the days will ...


2

There is also always the possibility of just not listing it at all. Your CV is meant to highlight the positives of your career. We don't list the rejected papers and proposals and other failures :-)


6

Since you are still working on it and haven't abandoned it, it seems an obvious candidate for a "Work in Progress" section of your CV. Other current projects can be listed there also. You don't really need to apologize, especially in the CV.


-1

This usually falls under other crimes, depending on the specific case. The most likely crimes are plagiarism and various kinds of forgery depending on the jurisdiction. There are other crimes that can be triggered as well, such as fraud and Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) copyright violation, ending in the general piracy crimes. Each case needs to be ...


2

Just what rights the journal has depends on the wording of the website and whatever terms you submitted your work under. A valid contract, at least in US law, requires meeting of the minds and exchange of consideration. If you agreed to terms as a result of a false belief (e.g. you believed that the journal has an impact factor that it does not in fact have, ...


2

Two and three page papers are rather common. The Proceedings of the American Mathematical Society used to have a section called "Shorter Notes" that had a page limit of three. This has been ended, but it is easy to find a two-pages paper published there in the past year or so, and many three-page papers. It seems that two-page papers are often ...


32

I don't see any reason not to contact the authors of the other paper, though it is possible that nothing can be done for an already published paper. But the conversation with them might be useful to everyone. I, personally, would thank them for alerting you to a problem with the published algorithm, giving you the opportunity/incentive to make a correction. ...


4

There is now a (reasonably) standard way of specifying author contributions, at least in some fields: a CRediT (Contributor Roles Taxonomy) statement, see http://credit.niso.org/. It was first introduced by Brand et al. (2015), and there are quite a few follow-up publications about it. E.g., Cell Press, Wiley and Elsevier do not seem to require it for all ...


20

Personally, I approach this question by explicitly framing related work in terms of categories and examples. In this manner, as long as the related work is within one of my categories, it is covered by the description even if the specific work is not cited. For example, in a paper about an improved algorithm for widget sorting, I might write something like ...


4

Yes, see for example this question over at History of Science and Mathematics SE. This links to a few papers that are only a page long: Eigenvalues of the Laplace operator on certain manifolds Counterexample to Euler's Conjecture Can n² + 1 unit equilateral triangles cover an equilateral triangle of side > n, say n + ε?


8

Since you're an undergrad, I suggest that you're not the most experienced with the dynamics of presenting at a conference, the subtleties about which conference is the best for your type of work, and a whole bunch of other things. Also, since you're an undergrad, you don't have any real allegiance to any PI. Your time is largely your own (assuming you haven'...


2

Ideally, he should be on the paper as author, if and only if his intellectual contributions appear in it. But practice differs in some fields and you likely need to adhere to the norms of the field, even if not ideal. If he is not an author, you need to acknowledge him for starting the project (at least). And "starting the project" may or may not ...


14

I've been in a very similar situation about two years ago. Now I'm a PhD student. While you are not under any obligation to tell them, I would strongly advise that you do. There are multiple reasons why: It will most likely improve your paper. Talking to people about your research tends to improve your research. Especially if the people are more ...


4

This community wiki answer was created from answers-in-comments. The other answers explain mechanisms by which "normal" academics can have very high paper counts. But there are also some (very unusual) instances of people who are just insanely productive (and not just putting their names on papers where their proteges do all the work). For instance,...


Top 50 recent answers are included