New answers tagged


This is highly dependent on what field you're in. I'm guessing physics from the question, but even so it depends on your subfield. Still, as a general matter of scientific methodology: there have been plenty of papers - including many good ones, and many famous ones - that have raised hypotheses and presented models, without also including experiments. This ...


This is impossible to answer without reading the actual paper, but I will do my best to give you an indication. If the hypothesis is exciting and the simulation is well-executed and also gives the expected results: probably publishable. Otherwise, probably not. Given that you need to ask this question here, it looks more like a "no", but don't let me (or ...


If you can’t reproduce the results at all, I’d back off. Don’t put your name on something you don’t trust. But feature extraction techniques, SEM, CFA etc are well known to be tenuous and very sensitive to the data. Any informed reader will (should?) already appreciate that.


It unfortunately sometimes happens that a professor or other PI may see a result from a student that they want to be true, but then a more junior student fails to reproduce the result, and the professor trusts the more senior student. If you have time and it is not too stressful for you, writing the paper can be good practice, and may help you communicate ...


You have two options. First option: decline to be the author of the paper, second option: write and submit the paper as first author. In the second case, the paper will go under review and the reviewers and the editors will decide if it is a good publishable result. Personally I would choose the second option in a high-medium ranking journal. In this way, if ...


You can convince your professor with more tangible datas. However, you have to master the statistical calculating methods for this and have to find the quality articles which reflect well the false one.

Top 50 recent answers are included