hmmmm.... getting a paper rejected...
A wise person once said not to be discouraged if a paper got rejected. I think i'm done wallowing in self-pity... i'm allowed to do it for some time...
Let's see those comments now...
The abstract should preferably be within 150 words.
mine was around 130 words...
Clearly give five keywords in alphabetical order at the end of the abstract.
ummm, now... I didn't know keywords had to be given alphy order... will keep that in mind.
Introduction to the papers may be in two to three paragraphs.
mine was all crammed in one...
There should be a clear paragraph for motivation of your work.
ugh... this is not the first time someone's telling me to write motivation properly... that is definitely an obstacle i'm still facing.
Clearly highlight the contributions of your work in a paragraph. This is mandatory. It gives a glimpse of your work to the reviewer.
okay, i failed to do that... since i'm not doing anything in real world... this part is shady even to me
The Literature Survey should be relevant and recent.
hate the literature survey part... i put literature survey i did initially for my problem statement for my Ph. D 2 years ago... don't judge... lack of time!!!
The Background work of the existing works for comparison should find place in the paper.
yup... i was under fire for not doing this properly since my Literature survey DC :(
System Model, Mathematical Model, Proofs, Theorems enhances the quality of your paper.
I actually wanted some feedback whether the equations i'm writing are correct... maybe in my next paper rejection i'll get those...
The algorithm should be simple and understandable and neatly put in a box. There are numerous algorithmic styles available on net. You can use any of them.
I used my own algorithmic style... don't think that was okay with the reviewer... i have to follow a good style... not hard to do... will do that.
Each paragraph should be in 6-7 sentences.
ummm... okay...
The implementation of the algorithm, comparison with existing state-of-the-Art works is mandatory.
my paper only had the theoretical part... hadn't started any implementations then... will do that now.
Your work should clearly stand out from other works and you should clearly state the reasons for improvement.
future enhancements... done!
Conclusions should be to the point, clear and terse.
J'accepte! My conclusion was all over da place...
The Bibliography gives the type of references you have been following to write your paper. The reviewer will be able to gauge the depth of your research from the Bibliographic references.
Follow the format, style sheet and template given to you meticulously.
I might have not have been too keen on the m-e-t-i-c-u-l-o-u-s part... will do that next time...
I wanted to send another wishy-washy paper... not prepared to get burnt again... I'll do more code now...
A wise person once said not to be discouraged if a paper got rejected. I think i'm done wallowing in self-pity... i'm allowed to do it for some time...
Let's see those comments now...
The abstract should preferably be within 150 words.
mine was around 130 words...
Clearly give five keywords in alphabetical order at the end of the abstract.
ummm, now... I didn't know keywords had to be given alphy order... will keep that in mind.
Introduction to the papers may be in two to three paragraphs.
mine was all crammed in one...
There should be a clear paragraph for motivation of your work.
ugh... this is not the first time someone's telling me to write motivation properly... that is definitely an obstacle i'm still facing.
Clearly highlight the contributions of your work in a paragraph. This is mandatory. It gives a glimpse of your work to the reviewer.
okay, i failed to do that... since i'm not doing anything in real world... this part is shady even to me
The Literature Survey should be relevant and recent.
hate the literature survey part... i put literature survey i did initially for my problem statement for my Ph. D 2 years ago... don't judge... lack of time!!!
The Background work of the existing works for comparison should find place in the paper.
yup... i was under fire for not doing this properly since my Literature survey DC :(
System Model, Mathematical Model, Proofs, Theorems enhances the quality of your paper.
I actually wanted some feedback whether the equations i'm writing are correct... maybe in my next paper rejection i'll get those...
The algorithm should be simple and understandable and neatly put in a box. There are numerous algorithmic styles available on net. You can use any of them.
I used my own algorithmic style... don't think that was okay with the reviewer... i have to follow a good style... not hard to do... will do that.
Each paragraph should be in 6-7 sentences.
ummm... okay...
The implementation of the algorithm, comparison with existing state-of-the-Art works is mandatory.
my paper only had the theoretical part... hadn't started any implementations then... will do that now.
Your work should clearly stand out from other works and you should clearly state the reasons for improvement.
future enhancements... done!
Conclusions should be to the point, clear and terse.
J'accepte! My conclusion was all over da place...
The Bibliography gives the type of references you have been following to write your paper. The reviewer will be able to gauge the depth of your research from the Bibliographic references.
Follow the format, style sheet and template given to you meticulously.
I might have not have been too keen on the m-e-t-i-c-u-l-o-u-s part... will do that next time...
I wanted to send another wishy-washy paper... not prepared to get burnt again... I'll do more code now...
No comments:
Post a Comment