We write candidate's work
This post may be useful to graduate students (and masters) when writing their scientific works, as it contains some observations and conclusions made by the author during the work on the Ph.D.
Probably the most important point and also the most difficult. There can be many reasons - from organizational ones, such as changing a university, department, or a manager to quite ordinary ones - the current direction is not interesting, and a new one has not yet been invented. But, as a rule, there is only one problem - which topic to choose for the candidate?
Some tips:
I was always told and convinced that the plan should always be at the very beginning of work in order to understand where we are now. Frankly, from the original plan is only the name "Plan". Many here may not agree, they say, if you can not even make a plan, what can you do? I will not argue, maybe someone else, but in practice I did not notice this.
')
Therefore, it is better to make a general plan, which will then be edited according to your research and results.
Many people before entering the graduate school (and after that) fall into a state that is close to fear and anxiety. Everyone is tormented by the questions: “so much has already been done in my field that I can bring in a new and unique one?”
First of all, you need to understand that far from everything in this world was invented and far from everything invented is optimal. Therefore, sit at the computer and act according to the principle:
What can be considered a scientific novelty?
So this:
Your work should be a single whole, i.e. All your results should be logically related. It looks obvious, but in practice everything is more complicated. As a rule, you get different results, use different methods from different areas and then it is very difficult (I don’t say impossible) to put all this in one chain. For example, I had to associate methods for obtaining associative rules, clustering methods, classical statistical methods, information theory and semantics. Even more difficult, when you studied in the magistracy one topic, and then switched to another. In this case, all your old scientific publications may not fit into the new theme. And if you have a shortage of work and you want to tie them, then it will be difficult to do.
Well, that is actually all simple - they are needed and as much as possible :)
An important fact is that you must have published articles on all points of scientific novelty. This is an important requirement and, as a rule, brings its own efforts at the end of work.
That's all for now, I hope that this topic will help someone. If there are any clarifying questions or are interested in individual issues (for example, acts of implementation or scientific articles), write, try to help.
Theme selection
Probably the most important point and also the most difficult. There can be many reasons - from organizational ones, such as changing a university, department, or a manager to quite ordinary ones - the current direction is not interesting, and a new one has not yet been invented. But, as a rule, there is only one problem - which topic to choose for the candidate?
Some tips:
- if you cannot decide, but the name of the topic is already required of you, then first choose a neutral one like “Simulation of complex objects in conditions of uncertainty”, under which 80% of modern objects fall, etc. After a while you can change the topic, add specifics, but formally the changes will not be dramatic and, in theory, there should be no problems;
- convince your supervisor that you do not need to choose a topic in which he is well versed, and not you. Although he must understand the topic that you offer him;
- well, and probably the most important thing: if you don’t know what to choose, ask yourself a simple question: “what do I know best?” or “and if I were given a lot of research money, what would I like to do?”. I think you will find the answer quickly (if not, then you should not go to graduate school?).
Work plan
I was always told and convinced that the plan should always be at the very beginning of work in order to understand where we are now. Frankly, from the original plan is only the name "Plan". Many here may not agree, they say, if you can not even make a plan, what can you do? I will not argue, maybe someone else, but in practice I did not notice this.
')
Therefore, it is better to make a general plan, which will then be edited according to your research and results.
We start research
Many people before entering the graduate school (and after that) fall into a state that is close to fear and anxiety. Everyone is tormented by the questions: “so much has already been done in my field that I can bring in a new and unique one?”
First of all, you need to understand that far from everything in this world was invented and far from everything invented is optimal. Therefore, sit at the computer and act according to the principle:
- problem -> is it solved? -> yes -> new problem ->
- problem -> is it solved? -> no or bad -> solutions -> research -> results
- problem -> is it solved? -> yes -> optimal solutions -> no -> improved solutions -> research -> results
- about your topic say how about tomorrow's future
- literature on your topic is in its infancy
- Russian / Ukrainian literature, scientific articles are missing
- Your topic is being carried out by leading research laboratories
- your topic belongs to a rapidly changing field (information search, object recognition)
Scientific novelty
What can be considered a scientific novelty?
So this:
- ideally: new model, new method
- improvement of the model method
- application (adaptation) of a known method, a model for new areas
- improving the quality, accuracy, speed, number of operations, etc. (it is necessary to indicate and justify the quality criteria)
- new or improved method or approach.
Single whole
Your work should be a single whole, i.e. All your results should be logically related. It looks obvious, but in practice everything is more complicated. As a rule, you get different results, use different methods from different areas and then it is very difficult (I don’t say impossible) to put all this in one chain. For example, I had to associate methods for obtaining associative rules, clustering methods, classical statistical methods, information theory and semantics. Even more difficult, when you studied in the magistracy one topic, and then switched to another. In this case, all your old scientific publications may not fit into the new theme. And if you have a shortage of work and you want to tie them, then it will be difficult to do.
Scientific publications, patents, acts of implementation
Well, that is actually all simple - they are needed and as much as possible :)
An important fact is that you must have published articles on all points of scientific novelty. This is an important requirement and, as a rule, brings its own efforts at the end of work.
That's all for now, I hope that this topic will help someone. If there are any clarifying questions or are interested in individual issues (for example, acts of implementation or scientific articles), write, try to help.
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/78725/
All Articles