M
 

 
  
   

M

 

       
 
 
      
›
M

m The systematic process of collecting and analyzing
information in order to increase our understanding of
the phenomenon with which we are concerned or
interested. ((

 

(
 
  
by Paul Leedy)
m ›t involves interpretation of data to draw conclusions
m Research is not restating previous facts
m ›t is not searching new knowledge for information
›
M

m žre you representing other peoplesǯ work in a stylish
well-understood manner?
m Then it is not a research
m žre you seeking knowledge on the architecture of cars
by buying a car?
m Then it is not research
›
M

m ÷riginates with a question or problem.
m Requires a clear articulation of a goal.
m Follows a specific plan of procedure.
m Usually divides the principal problem into more
manageable sub-problems.
m Guided by the specific research problem, question, or
hypothesis.
m žccepts certain critical assumptions.
m Requires the collection and interpretation of data in
attempting to resolve the problem that initiated the
research.
m Builds on previous research.
› 


M
 
 
m (

   ›n order to do that, you will have
to review literatures.
m 0

    The ideas you generated from
the knowledge gathered in literature review should be
carried out; analysis will be done; results will be
produced
m ½


 
 This documentation will be
the stem to produce
Ý 0  
  

 
 

 


Ý   

  


 (

 
ž 


   
  

 
 
  


 





  
       



 

  
  

›     
m The ‡       is a critical look at the existing
research that is significant to your project.
m "ou should 

 what has already been done, show
the 
 
 between different work, and show
how it relates to   project.
m ›t is not supposed to be just a summary of other
people's work.
› 

 
 
 
m hat do we already know in the area concerned?
m What are the existing theories?
m žre there any inconsistencies or other shortcomings?
m What views need to be (further) tested?
m What evidence is lacking, inconclusive, contradictory
or too limited?
m Why study (further) the research problem?
  M  M


m The ž
Portal
m http://portal.acm.com
m Kluwer ÷nline
m http://www.kluweronline.com
m ›xplore
m http://ieeexplore.ieee.org
m rossRef
m http://www.crossref.org
M
  

m žfter reviewing the relevant literature, you should
begin thinking about your proposal
m "our proposal will communicate your intentions to
your committee,
m ›t will serve as a plan for yourself and the committee,
and
m onnects yourself with the committee
m ›t should indicate that-
Ý " 


 
Ý "  
 

    
  
Ý "  
 
    
  


M
  

m ž Research Proposal will generally contain following
sections-
m (
‡  

Ý Which area the problem belongs to
Ý What has been done so far
Ý What problems are still not solved
Ý Why are those problems need to be solved
m C


Ý What problem are you particularly interested of

Ý What is your motive to solve that
Ý Narrower description of your research
M
  

m ž

Ý Brief description of your research
Ý How will you solve the problems
Ý What are the steps to accomplish your goal?
Ý žre you aware of the upcoming problems?
m 0‡‡

Ý ½ifference with other work
Ý How your research will contribute
m ž‡ 


Ý Where your findings can be applied
 ½




ž   
  

       


 
 

  




m ½ocumentation is vital as ž   

 





  
   

 

 
 


m ›f you wrote a good proposal, it should serve as the
basis for the beginning chapters for your thesis.



m "our thesis should meet the following criteria-
1. vidence of an original investigation or the testing of
ideas.
2. ompetence in independent work or experimentation.
3. žn understanding of appropriate techniques.
4. žbility to make critical use of published work and
source material.
5. žppreciation of the relationship of the special theme
to the wider field of knowledge.
6. ÷riginality as shown by the topic researched or the
methodology employed.
7. ½istinct contribution to knowledge.
 ›!"M#
m very scientific writing generally will have four
sections having an acronym of ›
Rž½-
Ý ›ntroduction
Ý
ethods
Ý Results and
Ý ½iscussion
Now, letǯs take a look at the very basic parts of a
technical documentation

m Title is a label- not sentence
m Fewest possible words that adequately describe the
contents of the thesis
m ›ndexing and abstracting services depend heavily on
the accuracy of the title
m žvoid abbreviations
# 

m žlphabetical order or order of importance
m Persons who actively contributed to the overall design
and execution of the experiments
m First name, middle name, last name
m žddress of institution where the research is done
m žddress in same serial to the authors
#$

m Precise summary of the content
m Brief summary of each of the sections
m Should not exceed 250 words though there is no hard
and fast rule
m States the principal objectives and scope of the
investigation
m ½escribes the methodologies employed
m Summarize the results
m State the principal conclusions
"
 
m nough background information so that reader can
understand results
m Reader should not need to refer to previous
publications on the topic
m ›ntroduction should describe
m ~
 
   
  

m 
  

 
m 
 
 
 
m ( 
  
m ( 
   
 


m ½escribe the experimental design
m Provide enough detail so that others can repeat the
experiment
m Use past tense
M


m ÷verall description of experiment
m Present the data
m Results are presented in past tense
m žvoid redundancy



 

m Try to present principles, relationships, and
generalizations shown by the results
m Point out any exceptions or any lack of correlation and
define unsettled points
m Show how your results and interpretations agree with
previously published work
m ½on't be shy; discuss theoretical implication of your
work as well as practical applications
m State your conclusions as clearly as possible
m Summarize your evidence for each conclusion
#% 
  
m žcknowledge any significant technical help, etc.
m žcknowledge any outside financial assistance
m Grants, contracts, or fellowships
M   

m List only significant, published references
m heck all parts of every reference against the original
copy the publications
m "ou can find Reference styles
1. http://www.computer.org/author/style/refer.htm
2. http://www.apastyle.org/
3. http://www.acm.org/pubs/submissions/submission.
htm
 (


~
   


~ 
  
 



›  $ 
m ›f you gather knowledge, apply it, invent something
new and do not share with scholars, the invention will
not be useful for human race
m To make your research useful, you can submit them to
journals
m ›n journals, your research will be archived and will be
plentiful to conduct other researches
m "ou can submit them to conferences
m "ou can share ideas with scholars that can broaden
your view and instil newer ideas

  


 $ 
m ›f you intend to publish your research work, then you
need to know the nuts and bolts-
Ý ›nformation on conferences
Ý all for Papers
Ý Review Process
Ý Submitting your Research Work
Ý Feedback from Reviewers
Ý Preparing Final Version
"      

m Personal web pages
http://www.tml.hut.fi/~pv/conferences.html
m Public databases
http://www.papersinvited.com/
m ÷rganizations
http://webapps1.ieee.org/conferenceSearch/search.do
http://campus.acm.org/calendar/
m S›Gs
http://www.sigmm.org/vents/events_page
   

m When you find a suitable conference, just donǯt blindly
submit your paper. arefully, take a look at-
Ý Title of the conference
Ý Where will it be held
Ý ½ate of conference
Ý ½eadline of paper submission
Ý Topics of ›nterest
Ý ›nstructions for žuthors
M    


m ›n order to place your paper in journal or a conference
proceedings, your paper will be reviewed generally
based on-
Ý ÷riginality of your research work
Ý ontribution to the knowledge-based society
Ý ÷rganization of the writing
Ý Quality of Language
Ý References you used
$ M

m Before submission ask comments from your colleagues
and supervisor
m When the paper is ready, prepare it according to the
›nstructions for žuthors
Ý m
 
Ý  

Ý ~  

Ý   
Ý   
$ M

m
ost conferences have electronic submission
Ý web page

Ý mail

m ÷therwise you have to submit the paper either using

normal or courier mail
m
ake sure that you get an acknowledgement from the
submission
%
$% M   

m Usually, conferences announce beforehand when the
review results should be ready
m The results are usually emailed to all authors
m Read the results carefully
m Remember that good conferences accept less than half
of the papers
m žcceptance ratio can be even below 20%
%
$% M   

m ›f the paper is not accepted, consider improving it
according to the comments and submitting it to
another conference
m Usually, it pays of to cool down for couple of days or
even weeks
  %& 
 
m
ake the corrections suggested by the reviewers
m Follow the instructions given the to the authors
m ÷ften, the final layout is different than the review
version
m Send the final version to the conference well before the
deadline
   ( 



›    


       






 
 

    


 
 
› 
 
'  

m 0

 
  

ake sure that your talk emphasizes the key ideas and skips over
what is standard, obvious, or merely complicated.
m ½     ½   ½
½etails are out of place in an oral presentation. This rule cannot
be over-emphasized.
m ›   
ž good speaker always lets the audience know exactly where they
are and where they are headed. "our presentation should be
broken into several distinct parts, each with its own objectives
and style. ach part should be dearly delineated.
› 
 
'  

m `    

ž sample time-frame for presentation of a paper can

be-
Ý ›ntroduction (5%)
Ý Proposal (15%)
Ý Theoretical basis, results and evaluations (45%)
Ý onclusion (15%)
Ý ½iscussion (20%)
<  #
 
m Practise your talk
m Use Repetition
m onvey nthusiasm, xcitement, onfidence
m Use Humour but donǯt over-run
m
aintain eye contact
m ontrol your voice
m ontrol your motion
m Take care with your appearance
m ½onǯt start talking with apologies
&

##


m ÷verhead projectors
m ½onǯt overload transparencies
m žvoid slide covering
m Use colors effectively
m Use pictures and tables
m Beware of the microphone
m Familiarize yourself with stage
’
#