In writing one article, I came across situation where my section title has one long word which I wanted to use with acronym later on. Now should I put acronym in section title or repeat word in text and write acronym there ? Take a following example for illustration…

Option 1

Section 1: Effect of Very Long Word (VLW) in section title

It is seen that VLW used in article sections are confusing part.

Option 2

Section 1: Effect of Very Long Word in section title

It is seen that Very Long Word (VLW) used in article sections are confusing part.

Which one is legal or appropriate in scientific writing ?

In mathematics, it is usual to call terminal results “theorems” and intermediate results “propositions” or even “lemmas” depending on importance and place in the overarching proof. Suppose that one is refereeing a paper where the authors have decided to call almost all their results “theorems”, making a paper with a large number of “theorems” that even emeritus professors don’t usually reach by the end of their career. (Such theorems include computation that could conceivably given to as end of year exams to master students. Not to diminish the importance of the paper, the actual theorems are good, but the 20 others are not theorems. There are more theorems than pages.)

Would it be acceptable and well-received to suggest toning it down? Or would it be overstepping and rude? This is not just a philosophical question: I truly believe that it makes the paper harder to reader, because it is difficult to separate the wheat from the chaff, so to say. A reader does not know what is important and what is not.

Recently I have a paper acceptance from a tier-1 conference in our field of telecommunication. I have also submitted the extended version in IEEE Transactions as well.

Is it ok (and acceptable) for me to write the patent out these papers? (I understand that paper acceptance does not guarantee patent acceptance)

What will be the academic/career benefits for me to write the patent at this stage when I am writing my thesis?

I am an international PhD student in Industrial Engineering at one of the average university. I have completed one year of my study. I already have an MBA from India. So it made sense to do PhD as I was very enthusiastic about this. I have good GRE scores, good academic history. I got TA position and funding for my first year. So I eagerly joined. But the moment I came here, I see new things each day: favoritism, racism. All the PhD students are made to complete 9 courses (just like MS students except the core courses), which doesn’t make sense as I already had my masters. I got scholarships for 4 courses each semester but was forced to take only 3 courses each semester citing work pressure. Now I have got an RA position, but this doesn’t have anything to do with actual research. I am made to sit in a local company with the workload of a full-time employee. This position is not in anyway related to my research proposal or dissertation topic. For my research, I will have to work concurrently with this RA position.

This is not I wanted. I wanted to work on my PhD in a lab, on the real problems. And not work for a company on shitty stipend and made to work as a regular employee. Moreover, my adviser is short-tempered, humiliates his students, yells, and bully. I have made up my mind to not be trapped in this environment for 4 more years.

What can I do now? I want to at least get a masters as I have a loan back in my country so, can’t go back. I have three more courses left. Whom should I talk to? Can they force me to do PhD? or if I quit with MS, can they ask me for full payment of fees? Can they not allow me to quit with MS?

I can’t go and ask dept. secretary because my advisor will get to know my intentions from her. For MS we need to complete 9 courses plus thesis. I have so far done 6 courses. I plan to take 3 courses this semester. All the PhD students are required to do this coursework even if they already have MS degree from USA. The MS students have to do 9 courses (2 doctoral level) from a certain list. The phd students have to do 9 courses(4 doctoral level). These doctoral level courses have the core subjects as prerequisites. The department head is very shrewd favoring a certain section of students. Even for such MS students, he waived off GRE scores and core courses. I know when he will get to know my intentions, he will try to block my graduation and scare me. I am just worried that after completing all courses, they don’t block my MS.

Thanks in advance!

I am a fresh graduate of Bachelor of Information Technology.
Recently, I found-out a Research concentration which is “Social Cognition and Human-Robot Interaction (S4HRI)”.

I have an interest to learn about robotics, which the future is based on, and I have some knowledge about psychology, but I am afraid that if I will complete my graduate studies in S4HRI, so I should go deeply with psychology and know more about cognitive science, where I don’t know if I will succeed in this field and like it or not.

From your opinion, is it a good step to complete in Social Cognition and Human-Robot Interaction fields and merge the technology with psychology, or focus on technology only?

Also, if you knew a technique to help me decide which concentration I have to choose based on my interests so I will be much thankful to you.

I’ve recently quit my job as a maths teacher after doing it for 3 years and I have been incredibly lucky to be offered a fully funded doctoral training course at a top university. This is an extraordinary opportunity for me, especially given that I previously withdrew from a PhD, and this time I really want to make it work.

I am quite rusty on some things that many other starting students will not be, not because I can’t do them but because it’s been a very long time since I needed to apply them. I am currently a bit worried that I may be the weakest in the cohort or that it’ll take me a very long time to understand simple things and that I may feel incompetent and like I don’t deserve to be there.

What are some good ways to overcome these feelings of idiocy?

I’ve heard the government in the United States is planning to migrate the legal status of public libraries into a McDonalds like private company which means to commercialize book borrowing and see the user as a customer. From my point of view this is a really bad idea because many employees will loose their jobs and the remaining one will get a lower pension. The problem is, that some business consultants propagate the idea very strong and see it as best practice method for everything: reducing costs, improve the quality and compete with Google. My idea is to not change anything and freeze the libraries as a democratic institution without the need to compete in a market. How can we do this, how can we resist against privatization?

I recently published a paper at a ACM conference. Before the conference proceedings become available, I also uploaded my paper in arxiv. Google scholar immediately picked up that arxiv paper. However, I made a stupid mistake and my arxiv paper was missing the entire reference section. I reuploaded the paper with the new draft, but Google scholar hasn’t picked it up yet, and all the papers that cited are not picked up by the citation graph at Google Scholar.

In the mean time, the ACM paper is not available on the web, but it is not available in Google scholar. It doesn’t show in Google scholar search too. I just want to make sure that my references in either arxiv or acm version of paper are crawled. Does Google scholar crawl the paper only once when it becomes available? How should I fix this issue?