The best method for presentation of research results papers

[admin]

Title

Choose a title that enables the expert to figure out the essence of the basic idea(s) and the main contribution(s).

 Wrong title may bring you wrong referees or examiners, and may not attract busy colleagues to your work when seeing it on your web page or on a search engine that may not even catch your work (which decreases your visibility). If you are solving problem X using method Y, you have probably searched Internet for both X and Y. Others do the same, so let your work be observed easily.

Abstract



Introduction



Literature review

Chapter or section 2 should give a full literature review. It should collect all known results relevant to the problem stated, whether or not they are used in proposed contributions. No additional literature review shall be added in later chapters. In later chapters, you may only refer to well known results (e.g. those covered in undergraduate computer science program such as Dijkstra's shortest path algorithm, sorting algorithms etc.). Discuss advantages and drawbacks of known solutions that are relevant to your problem, and also discuss the relevance of each reviewed item to your topic and your solutions.

   
    It is very easy for a reviewer or even examiner to save his time by observing a missing important reference, and claiming that that reference may solve your problem in a better way. That may or may not be true, but you can loose even if your solution is better, since decisions made are in most cases final, and your publication or even defense can be prolonged with or without good reasons.

    For every discussed reference, it is very important to relate them to your problem and contribution in one of several ways: it does not exactly solve the same problem, it solves the same problem but makes different assumptions about the system, it has some limitations that you do not have, it makes the same assumptions but does not work well under certain conditions and scenarios for which you have better solutions, or, if none of these is true, you are considering it as valid competitor, and will try to defeat it in your analytical or experimental comparisons. If you are not able to defeat it (under some assumptions and/or scenarios), I would advice you not to go public with your research and earn undesirable reputation.


The remaining chapters (sections)



Conclusion

What did you achieve with this research? What are the drawbacks of your solution(s)? What kind of future work can be done? Do you have some ideas that you intend to study further? The ownership of some other possible solutions, not fully explored, or subject of your forthcoming different article, can be protected by outlining them briefly in the conclusion section, sometimes with reference to upcoming article.

    To conclude this advise, try to follow a +-+ pattern in introduction and main text. That is, start with positive enthusiastic comments about your work and contribution, then become realistic and list all the drawbacks and limitations, but then finish on a positive note, with a clear winner statement about the value of your contribution. It is important that the reader stops reading your article with positive impression. He might be writing his report afterwards.

    Finally, it is very important to use proper English grammar and sentence structure. Ask for help if your English is not up to the required standard. You must be very careful with misprints. Do read your article carefully one more time, after some time delay, and check for possible misprints. The referees and examiners expect you to be very professional. They are not robots, they are human, and their opinion is partially subjective. Try to make positive value for the subjective part in overall evaluation by showing that you take care of your writing.