New answers tagged

1

What is publishable is up to the publisher with advice from some reviewers who, ideally, know the field and what is important. But, since research is supposed to lead to knowledge, the fact that something is not true can be as important as knowing what is. In particular, this situation that you describe gives the limits of what you call causality here, which ...


1

The fact that the results are "interesting but incremental" means you have done something of value, so your paper is probably publishable somewhere. You have two options you should consider: (1) try to expand the work to make it more than incremental before trying to publish; or (2) accept the existing incremental result and try publishing in ...


3

Probably too early. Don't assume that the paper isn't evaluated yet. Most likely it was judged in scope and they are simply looking for referees. Wait a little bit more.


3

Depends on both the journal and field, but at least in some engineering journals this would be too soon. Editors can often be overworked. Also, it can be difficult to find willing reviewers - and that's a process that the editor can't speed up even if they want to.


2

My interpretation is that the reviewer(s) consider that solving the specific problem is not a particularly significant outcome. Assuming that they are right in this judgement (they may not be), the paper must distinguish itself in other ways. Maybe the problem/solution is shown to have parallels with some other problem/solution. Maybe the solution is ...


7

As far as the journal is concerned, your paper was declined (if I understood you correctly) and the next submission will be treated as a separate paper (even though the journal may know it's a new iteration of an old paper and it may still get the same associate editor and reviewers). This paper may have different authors, substance, or whatever -- it's a ...


1

There's clearly a conflict of interest here and it might clearly affect your reputation (if by chance, not your academic profile/publication). However, the way out will be to either ask your advisor to submit it or solve this matter with him first. Then and only then, the matter of resubmission is to be taken into consideration. If you're resubmitting to the ...


1

If the advisor has a valid claim on authorship it would be misconduct to remove them as an author. Probably plagiarism. The journal would object if it knows, which it might, due to the earlier submission. I think you would be wise to work this out with your advisor: who is author, what order, etc. It they decide to let you publish as a sole author you still ...


1

There are several things that I'd like to add in order to be able to help you in understanding what you're actually asking. In accordance with your question: I'd like to know where do people usually submit their AI paper. This is perhaps the authors' preference and needs a background check of the widely available avenues and journals in the area of ...


-1

Apply for postgraduate study at the closest university. My advice would be to apply for postgraduate study at the nearest university to you; you'd most likely want to apply for either a PhD in Mathematics or a research-based Master's Degree, if your university offers the latter. This way, helping you to get your discovery published would be a part of your ...


0

It is undoubtedly subjective. But take the same researcher or PhD student. Being in an interdisciplinary field and having a rather interdisciplinary formation I am hundred percent sure some research lines potentially lead to more papers than others. No doubt about it. However your question asks two different things, or better seems to assume the number of ...


1

The problem is that everybody is very well aware of the challenges and difficulties in their own discipline, but only have an outsiders view on the others. There are those who switched disciplines, who have a somewhat better view on both. However, remember that there was reason why they switched. So they are unlikely to be representative for their old ...


3

A TA doesn't directly fund your research. It funds you, personally and allows you to be a student. Your research hasn't been funded specifically other than the fact that you may have an office, etc. There is probably a tuition waiver, which is a sort of general funding. You could list the department and university generally as you suggest. You could probably ...


1

Aries is a private company that operates the journal management program Editorial Manager. Every journal has its own "Editorial Manager", configured with its settings. The message sounds to me like Aries's servers hosting this journal's Editorial Manager is having issues. If so, it's obviously not ideal, but it's also why servers need to be ...


8

Social and reputational factors play a big role here. If a student gets away with significant plagiarism and is later found out, that does not cast a favorable light on the original assessment of the thesis--specifically, the role of the advisor, who should oversee the thesis writing process and ensure that the submitted thesis adheres to the methodological ...


8

I certainly won't and can't speak for all cases, but it is still true that a doctoral student is a student and is in a learning situation. Therefore, some universities will treat plagiarism as they do other sorts of misconduct and try to turn it into a learning situation so that the student can improve their practices and ethics. The alternative of failing ...


0

Something has generated this reviewer's request, and you need to try to figure out what that is. Often, when people ask for an example, it is because something is less than clear when no example was provided. I suggest coming up with an illustrative simulation to try to satisfy this reviewer.


1

If you don't intend to do any real experiments any time soon, the best response is for you to be honest in your reply. Explain again that your work consists of a theoretical technique and that (if it's the case) it will be validated experimentally in future works. Maybe support it with a new graph (as Anonymous Physicist suggested), maybe change some ...


1

There are two obvious possibilities here. The review says only irrelevant things. In that case, simply respond to the editor: "I was unable to determine the relationship between the comments of Reviewer 1 and the submitted manuscript. Clarification would be appreciated." The editor will conclude the referee did not read the paper and the review ...


1

In my discipline, neuroscience, it is expected to respond point-by-point to all the reviewers. Sometimes, it is as simple as "Thank you for bringing that mistake to our attention. It has been corrected" but it can also be "While that is an interesting suggestion, it is outside of the scope of this paper." If your paper is accepted with ...


15

No, it's not okay to do that, it is academic misconduct to have authors on a paper who have not made a contribution rising to the level of authorship. There is no single central set of authorship guidelines, but you'll find them from various discipline-specific societies, universities, publishers, etc. Some examples: http://www.icmje.org/recommendations/...


0

It's not fair to say the journal isn't responding. They clearly are - "I do apologize, but I have no further information at this time. The editor is working diligently to get decisions out as soon as possible." Evidently the person who isn't responding is the editor (or possibly the reviewers). Here you are out of luck. If it's the editor not ...


0

The average length of time that it takes for a manuscript to work its way through the submission/review process can vary from one discipline to the next, and I'm not really sure what that would be for yours. Coming from my own experience in the humanities, I would normally expect an editor to take no longer than a month to get a manuscript out to reviewers. ...


2

If you submit a previously-rejected paper to the journal, what happens in principle* is that the editorial management system flags the paper as a duplicate. Screenshot if you want to see what it looks like from the other side. Once flagged, the editor (or more likely the desk editor, i.e. the employee of the publisher) will have to decide if they should pass ...


4

Some journals won't accept a resubmission after rejection. For some others it might depend on the reason for rejection. If the editor deemed it not suitable for the journal it isn't likely to be reconsidered. But otherwise you should be able to resubmit it. You can also ask the editor whether it would be advisable or not. Follow their advice, of course. And &...


3

Has there really been an increase in papers co-authored by undergraduates? These facts can be established: There has been an increase in the number of undergraduates, except for recently in a few areas that have falling birth rates. There has been an increase in the number of papers published. The average number of authors per paper has increased. For most ...


2

This answer is specific to the US. I think the Canadian system is a bit different. It still seems relatively rare that undergraduates are able to publish significant research while enrolled in a US university. A few will, of course, but not so many due to the nature of the US curriculum, which is intended for a general education with only some specialization....


2

The first thing I would do is to try contacting your partner again. You've said you already told him that you prefer a more cooperative style, but perhaps you should can be clearer about this. For example, if you say "I think you aren't communicating well, I need you to cooperate more", this is ambiguous and could possibly be interpreted as an ...


5

Your clock is running faster than their clock. They have a lot of people to coordinate with and a lot of editorial work, I suspect. This isn't the only publication they are dealing with, most likely. And if everyone is sending them mail every few days it just bogs down the process even further. It may even be a good thing that it is taking time. A predatory ...


3

I agree with @Spark's comment that minor errors are ubiquitous, and (taking the information from your comment that the errors are indeed minor), you could contact the editor and ask if could submit a corrected version immediately. Another thing to keep in mind is that most journals follow a procedure where they will contact you before publication with proofs ...


-1

If your research data comes from people, your sharing of the data needs to be approved through an ethical review process, or an exemption from that process must be obtained through the exemption process. CSV format seems to be the most reliable data format; it does not matter if your data is quantitative of qualitative. Your choice of repository should be ...


8

I can tell you with absolute certainty that almost every published paper contains at least one minor mistake. At the very least, I know that every single one of my papers has at least one typo that survived several rounds of reviews and revisions, and I can always find an error or two in every paper that I read carefully. If the error is not a substantial ...


0

For computer science, it is common to mix these two approaches. At some point in your work, you start thinking about nice little "packages" into which you can wrap part of your work and that are independent contributions to the state of the art...the papers. You have an idea what your paper is about, and then you search for a conference that fits ...


0

What field? What's typical in your area? Ask your advisor. When I was a student, in my area, computational fluid dynamics using the finite element method, things tended to go: talk or poster (with no paper/abstract only minisymposium) journal paper or invited paper to conference proceedings unless it had been a while since we'd been to a relevant ...


3

I will first list some alternatives I have encountered. I will leave it up to you whether they are true alternatives or just riffs on IMRaD and whether they are actually formalised structures: Particularly in the life sciences journals request the structure Introduction – Results – Discussion – Methods, where the latter is kind of an appendix. However, this ...


3

Assuming that you weren't the original source of the question, then it is entirely proper that you mention and cite it. Interesting mathematical questions can come from anywhere and from anyone. But if you are inspired by the thoughts of another person, then hey should get credit for that. Ideally a citation should point to a real person, though anonymity on ...


2

I suppose the results of your mathematical derivations matter for your paper's conclusions, not the way you derived them. The results will probably have a natural place where they belong in your paper. If the derivations are short, you can present them there. But if the derivations occupy significant space (and aren't part of your core content), presenting ...


5

As Tim Gowers wrote in 2013 in the context of an experimental peer review website: [...] It is easy to come up with ideas for websites where people can review papers, complete with clever protocols for how the reviewing should take place, whether it is open, reward systems, etc. etc. It’s much less easy to persuade people to use the sites that are created ...


1

My answer is complementary to the answers given by others, so please take them into account too. You mentioned that your colleagues work in different fields. Did you ever compare your research output to others within your own specialization? In what journals do other scientists in your field publish? Is it common for your field to get into high impact ...


5

I'm taking the definition as provided in OP: Why isn't full-fledged self-archival with classical peer review and curation, post-publication commenting, and avoidance of old-school production procedures finally taking off? The first part has already "taken off" and is standard in my field (physics). The latter part, post-publication commenting, ...


4

In a sense, there is post-publication review: It just doesn't happen on websites, but in subsequent papers written by others. And the opinions of others are also recorded: In a sense, a citation is like a "Like" on Facebook: The citing authors thought the cited paper offered some useful background to readers of their authors. In other words, papers ...


4

Yes, you can email both the authors and the editor of the journal. A correction might be issued. But it is worth a bit of effort. Of course, if it is obvious in the paper then it may be that it has been noticed by many and they have responded, or just ignored the error as obvious and moved on. But it you have some evidence that the error has affected the ...


5

As in the other answers, the premise of the question is a bit inaccurate. For work that turns out to be important, people look at it critically (with interest) long after it has supposedly been "refereed" and "published" (in the sense of being endorsed by a journal). And will look at it critically (with interest) as soon as it's available ...


4

Because post-publication peer reviews are not currently recognized as useful contributions, so why do them when I could do something that would help me get a job?


27

Most papers that are published are uninteresting. The median paper has less than one reader not counting the authors and the reviewers. The current reviewing system relies on a network of responsibilities that are independent of the author. The editors have a responsibility to the community as a whole to get papers reviewed properly, and the community gives ...


5

In a sense, post publication peer review has always been in place. Prior to publication peer review has the purpose of improving a paper before it appears (or at least prior to its formal publication). This is normally a private matter between a journal or conference and the authors. Post publication, however, peer review has a different purpose and can no ...


16

In a sense, it has taken off; you just need to change your definitions: in mathematics, most papers get peer reviewed after they have appeared on the Arxiv and are available to the public. Results then appear in prestigious journals, so they are ultimately trusted and used to evaluate researchers and compare academic egos, only after they have been carefully ...


0

One of my articles was published "as is" in J. Math. Phys. The two referees just mentioned that the result was correct. The article was relatively short, the result was good (even if I say that myself) and relatively easy to check, so I am not sure any profound conclusion can be made based on this outcome of my submission.


0

Does it mean your paper will go through another round of review? Not necessarily. It depends on whether the editor invites new reviewers. "Awaiting reviewer invitation" should strictly be a very brief status, since the time between the editor deciding to invite reviewers and the editor actually inviting reviewers should be very brief, on the order ...


1

I don't know what "awaiting reviewer invitation" means. But usually, the paper with minor revision will be sent directly back to the same reviewers for the final decision. They need to check whether you revise according to their reviews.


Top 50 recent answers are included