How to write a thesis-writing experience of a university professor and reviewer

It takes most of my spare time to review five or six kinds of journals and magazines nationwide. The annual review volume is less than 100. In recent years, I feel that the manuscript quality is not as good as before. When I started reviewing the review in the past few years, the pass rate of the first review was above 90%. In the past year, there were only about 20% of the review requests. There were various problems that needed to be changed, and about 60% of the review attempts were rejected. I often wonder if I have read too many articles, my eyes have read too much, and I am not used to anything. If I think about it carefully, it is true that the quality of the articles has declined significantly recently.
On one occasion, I held a forum in the editorial department of a journal on how to improve the level of the journal. The premise of improving the level is that the quality of the manuscript is high, which is widely accepted. The same is true for the decline in the quality of manuscripts in recent years. As for the reason, the benevolent wise sees the wise. Some comrades believe that the author team is younger. Some comrades believe that the number of papers is determined in the evaluation system of certain individuals or organizations, resulting in a pure pursuit of quantity and abuse. We should admit that these can all be the reasons, but some of them are not transferred by our own will. We should see that the rejuvenation of the author team is an inevitable trend and a good thing, especially when the young authors are in a period of great creativity. Article Important Guarantee. In my opinion, the decline in the quality of the paper is more serious, but the main reason is that the basic training of the paper writing is not enough. This situation can be changed through hard work. Therefore, I have summarized the problems encountered during the review, hoping to help some authors write.
I. Contents of scientific papers
I have studied in middle school. The main types of articles are narrative and argumentative papers. The narrative is about the background, process, and impact of an event. You can also add some comments from the author. In this paper, we will talk about the arguments for some problems and the evidentiary work to prove the correctness of the arguments, that is, providing arguments, reasoning, and finally drawing conclusions. Therefore, these two genres are quite different. There is also a genre that is close to argumentative papers, but strictly speaking it is not a Argumentative Essay. It only expresses its own views or opinions on certain problems or phenomena. Although there are opinions, it does not prove the correctness of the viewpoint intentionally, this article is a casual article in prose.
Scientific papers should be argumentative papers, at least with a point of view. In layman's terms, the main problem to be solved in scientific papers is not "what", but "How to do" and "why". For articles on "How to do, it is best to have "why do you want to do this" content.
Some authors may easily write argumentative papers into narrative articles, especially summative articles after the study of a project. They only talk about how they did it, and seldom talk about why they did it. The reason may be that the writing is smooth, because the work is done by others, and the process is very clear, so you can understand it without any effort. This article is not deep enough. Software has received much attention in recent years, but most software articles are in this situation. In addition, the software has a lot of clues. I want to understand it, regardless of the width and scope. The length is not short, and it is a bit confusing.
Scientific Papers are neither a work summary nor a manual.
The correctness of the paper content is of course very important. However, errors in different fields are very different and difficult to summarize. However, pay attention to the following points:
(1) There must be at least new ideas. Whether there is innovation is the main starting point for many publications to be hired. authoritative publications such as Chinese science cannot be hired without innovation. It can be said that there are two types of innovation: Original Innovation and integration innovation. In engineering papers, there are few Original Innovations, most of which are new methods and methods. Algorithm Or, it is an integrated innovation to analyze a problem in a method that has not been used by others. Although this is also desirable, the paper must explain the results achieved through the adoption of new methods. There is a paper that describes the Road Extraction Method for color images based on hermit splines. There are no mistakes in the method, but there are two conclusions. First, we can use hermit splines to obtain continuous marking lines after fitting the extracted intermittent road marking lines. In fact, the general cubic spline or polynomial fitting can also solve this problem; second, Hermit splines are more suitable for expressing curved road markings on images, but no data shows why other fitting curves are not suitable. In this way, although the hermit spline has not been used in road extraction, the new ideas of this paper will disappear.
(2) The paper must be written with emphasis. There was an article about the robot's smart hand. The project itself was doing well, but this article described the structure, finger drive, and grip control of the smart hand in all aspects, each part is not thorough and has no depth. It would be much better if this article focuses on the drive of limited-size smart hands. There is also an article about remote technology. First, we talked about the structure of the micro-camera in a general sense, and then extracted the basic concepts of fuzzy control from some books, there is no organic connection between the two, and such an article has no content at all. I am afraid I can write something more if I focus on the problems solved in the microminiaturization of the visual system.

(3) The content of the thesis should be true and correct. This is important. It is a good scientific ethics to avoid frauds. This article cannot be used if people see false things. There is an article about the write control algorithm that simulates the algorithm. The joint angle function used for simulation is Q = 0.1sin (3 π T), the cycle is obviously (2/3) S, and the cycle of the simulation curve is 2.8 S, the maximum angle velocity is much smaller. Such results at least make people suspect that the author has not actually done simulation.
(4) Summary articles. The content of this summative article is mainly about the previous researches on a specific topic, the issues that have been solved, and the issues that need to be further studied, the most important thing is to point out the direction for further research on this topic. In this sense, it is actually difficult to write a summary article, which requires a large amount of data. In addition, it is necessary to analyze the data, store the data in rough format, and store the data in real time. Never write a summary after reading several published papers.
Explain the formulas in this paper. Scientific Papers generally require formulas. The correctness of formula derivation is important, but it is not necessary to clarify the derivation process step by step. Some articles write formulas, but do not pay attention to the symbols used in the formulas, and do not pay attention to the applicable conditions of the formulas. Such formulas are useless. In an article, the author tries to establish a mathematical model of the parallel mechanism using three artificial muscles as actuators, and first describes the relationship between the input pressure of the artificial muscles and the muscle length, let's also list the force equilibrium equations. Then we can combine the previous formula with the latter formula to obtain a non-linear state equation and use it as a mathematical model. There are many coefficients in the equation, obviously related to the mechanism and muscle parameters. The author does not write the relationship between the coefficients and parameters, which leads to the doubt whether the model is derived. Even if such a model is just generic and useless.
Ii. Title of the paper
The title of the thesis plays an important role. The title should be very relevant to the content of the article. This is often ignored. Some titles are too large; others are too limited. The title of this article is "service robot humanoid arm Kinematics Research", which is the author's analysis of a kind of Seven Degrees of Freedom arm kinematics when developing a service robot. "Anthropomorphic" is not important. It is important that the author proposes a solution for the inverse kinematics of the redundant Degrees of Freedom arm. Such a solution is not only used for serving robots. If the title is changed to "a solution to the inverse kinematics of the Seven Degrees of Freedom imitation human arm", it has both academic significance and the author's research project. Another topic in this paper is "Study on the joint Lubrication Technology of the moon landing robot", which describes the preparation and characteristics of a solid lubricating film. The question of this paper is too big, and if it is clearly stated that the moon landing robot should have an experiment in the simulation of the Moon's ultra-low vacuum, ultra-low temperature, strong dust environment, there is no condition at present. If we change the title to "Study on Preparation Methods and properties of MoS2-based solid lubricating Films", we will not only narrow down the scope, but also avoid experiments that are not yet available. There are still some questions in this paper. For example, if there is a doctoral thesis titled "dynamic walking control of human-like robots", is there static walking? Certainly not. It is dynamic to stay in the same position. Isn't such a title a joke?
Iii. Summary
Summary is a summary of the content of the article. The abstract should be concise. You only need to describe the purpose of writing the paper, the methods used and the results obtained. The abstract is often useless. For example, "with the development of robot technology, the application field is wider, and a certain problem becomes a hot topic of research" is useless.
Iv. Introduction
The purpose of this paper is to propose the problems to be solved by kaizongmingyi. The introduction should be simple and straightforward. Some write robot articles. At the beginning, I wrote a Drama written by a Czech writer. A machine slave called robota. In 1950, the United States created the first industrial robot, which went around a large circle, it is a bit "must be called Greece ".
Many papers briefly describe the work done by the predecessors in this aspect, which is necessary. In particular, it is more necessary to put forward improvements to previous methods. It should be noted that the generalization of previous work should not be taken out of context. If we intentionally distort the meaning of others and highlight the advantages of our methods, we will not be able to take it out of context. In a thesis, the generalization of previous work should be put into the introduction as much as possible. In the text, if it is not necessary, there should be no more such paragraph.
The quote of the document must be correct. Some documents are referenced in your article. Other articles may also reference your article. If you do not pay attention to the correctness of the reference, it is possible to pass the verification. An article about remote operations references the article in nature, which mentions remote operations in 7000km cities, it takes only 150 μs to send the operation command from the operation end to the feedback from the execution end. This is totally impossible. It takes at least 46.67 Ms even if the waves are transmitted in a straight line. Later, it was found that the Unit was wrong when the author quoted it. If the article is published, with the authority of nature and the influence of the author of the article, the wrong data will certainly be cited.
Some papers also began to reference documents and messages on the Internet. The reliability of the online literature is better. due to various reasons, the message availability is not high. We used armored vehicles to develop a remote control target car for a test base. We have reported this in "weapons knowledge. Due to the inaccessibility of some content, some technical measures have been made to the article. The news turned to "Remote Control armored vehicles developed in China" and "ant" to "elephant ". Therefore, to reference online messages, you must verify the messages through other channels.
Many papers also explain the structure of the article in the introduction. Although there are few words, it is not necessary. Due to the large length of the dissertation, it is appropriate to explain the structure of the entire essay in the introduction. This is not necessary for articles published in publications.
V. Experiment verification
The purpose of the experiment in this paper is to verify the correctness, feasibility and effectiveness of the theory or method proposed in this paper. At one stage, I do not agree to call simulation an experiment. But as simulation technology advances, it can at least become a verification method.
The correctness of the theory is not always verified by experiments. New theorems that are proven using accepted theorems do not need to be verified.
The feasibility of the method is relatively simple. The experiment only needs to describe the method used to solve the problem.
The validation of methods (especially algorithms) is not good in many papers. The so-called effectiveness should be faster or simpler than other methods to solve the problem, or the computing complexity is low, the computing speed is higher, or the memory usage is small. To describe the effectiveness, we need to make a comparison. We cannot "Old Wang sells melons", and we need to have corresponding data.
In this sense, the experiment in this paper is often a specially designed experiment to illustrate the problem. Experiment design is very important. To explain the role of a factor, try to isolate it.
I have successively reviewed four papers on building a robot simulation team. In addition to more descriptive content, these four papers are well written. The content of this article involves personal skills, decision-making mechanisms, and overall coordination. Moreover, the team both participated in the simulation Group of the World Cup of Robot Football, and both won the runner-up. This means that the technical measures adopted in the team building age are still effective. However, these four articles use the score of the competition to demonstrate the effectiveness of technical measures. This is not suitable. Because the score of the football match is only a ranking, which only shows the relative strength of the benchmark team. If your opponent's strength is too low, even if you win the championship, you cannot effectively explain that the measures you have taken are correct. Moreover, as mentioned above, whether a team can win is related to individual skills, decision-making ability, overall coordination, and other factors, which of the following factors plays a role in achieving good results is often unclear. In the last two articles, the author used the same results to explain the effects of different technical measures, which is obviously unconvincing. If the same opponent takes the measures in the paper and does not use this measure for two matches, the results of the competition can better illustrate the role of this measure.
Many papers cannot use strict theories to prove the correctness and effectiveness of the method for various reasons, and cannot do experiments for the time being. Therefore, simulation methods are used to explain this problem. At this time, it should be noted that although the article can only give a few simulation instances, but when doing simulation, we should try to make more examples for various possible situations, because, the conclusion illustrated by the simulation results of one or two instances is likely to be overturned by another instance. One paper looks for a shortest traversal path between several points that are known to each other. The paper is very long, and many circles are used in the method. The method is correct, but it is not proved. Finally, an instance is used for simulation. I wrote a simpler method during the review, which is consistent with the results obtained by the method in the paper. In this way, although the method proposed in this article is good, it has no meaning at all.
Vi. Conclusion
There are not many problems in the conclusion, but there are not many brilliant conclusions. Because word and other text processing software provide the convenience of "copying" and "pasting", some words in the text, introduction, and abstract of the paper are also copied to the conclusion, the conclusion is no longer appealing. However, I occasionally encounter "overhead", and the problems that are not involved in the text suddenly come out in the conclusion. The rare case is that some of the conclusions of some papers have overturned some or all of the arguments in the article.
VII. Text
When I used to write with a pen, I often heard people say "the word is the face of a person", which means that a good word will add luster to you and look comfortable. Now, all the words in the paper are printed by the printer. If the article is fluent, it becomes "Human Face. As the saying goes, if there are too many questions in the text of an article, the author will not be quite impressed.
In the submission for review, there are outstanding text and punctuation issues;
(1) A sentence, a sentence, where to think, where to speak, the tone and meaning are not consistent.
(2) repetition of semantics, Wordy use of words, and poor use of pronouns.
(3) fictitious words such as "and", "hence", "ran", and "it" are used in a awkward way.
(4) improper use or creation of technical terms, which is the least possible text problem in the paper. If terminology in a certain field already has national standards, although such standards are generally recommendation standards, standard-approved terms should also be used first in order to have a "common language" with others ". In this paper, we should not use a common name, even if such a term has been used by many people. There is a connotation in terms, and each term stored is strictly defined when terms are formulated. If you have to create a new term in the paper, you must make it clear and have a strict definition. I have questioned "trajectory tracking control" in a paper. On the surface, it seems that "tracking control" is still justified. Think twice. What can be connected to "control" is nothing more than two types of words. One is an object, for example, "temperature control", "pressure control", "location control", and "Force Control". The other is the method, such as "PID control", "adaptive control", and "fuzzy control. What is "Track Tracking Control? Track Tracking is neither a control object nor a control method. The actual trajectory tracking of the expected trajectory is the result of controlling the motion trajectory. Therefore, "Track Tracking" and "Track Control" are both available terms, while "Track Tracking Control" is untenable. Also, the commercial and Hong Kong-based Terminologies such as "computer" and "cd" should not be used in academic articles.
Use punctuation. The most common mistake is the full stop, long sentences, or incorrect sentences. Only question marks and exclamation points are the most difficult to use.
In recent years, there has been a very fashionable and widely used word "based ". Sometimes, the title of a magazine is "based on. The "X-based" English is "X-based" or "based on X ". It should be said that the word "based" is well translated. The "rule-based system" is better than the "rule-based system" and "rule-based system" translated in earlier years. The problem is that "based" must be used properly. It is not a non-usable place, but it is not necessary to use it to pursue the wrinkle taste. Moreover, since X is based on X, X should be a real thing that can be regarded as the basis. An article uses "task-level ......", This "task-level" is not a real thing. Another improper word is "intelligence", and some things that do not have intelligence are also taken with this hat.
In fact, it is not difficult to solve text problems. After writing the article, the author only needs to repeat it once or twice. Most text problems can be found. However, if the author's oral expression is not standardized, it will not be very effective.
8. Special English documents
English is not our native language. Of course there will be some problems when writing papers in English. Most people do not have the ability to think in English. In this case, it is better to write the documents first and then translate them into English, which at least avoids the inconsistency of semantics when writing the English documents directly.
The most common problems in English documents are:
(1) the so-called "Chinese English" is formed by hard translation of Chinese ". Although we will not see "Good good study, day up" and "YANG Jing bang", hard translation is still common. There is a thesis that translates "vehicle-mounted" into "tank-load". In fact, the word "vehicular" means vehicle-mounted.
(2) Improper use of prepositions. The use of "of" and "to" is more, and the use of other prepositions is less.
(3) the pronoun "this" and "that" is used much, and "it" is used less, while the latter is used much in Science and Technology articles.
(4) The sentence is monotonous. You like (or have to) to use "to be" to form a sentence.
The operator does not pay attention to the part of speech of the verb. Some verbs are both thing-and-thing verbs, and should be used as sentences first, instead of passive voices of thing-and-thing verbs.
Improper use of the titles "A" and "the", especially the use of the "".
⑺ You do not pay attention to the single and plural nouns, and do not pay attention to the person-to-person cooperation between the subject and the predicate.
The words in the essay should be more formal and should be used as few words as possible. For example, "get" in the spoken language means "get", but the best "obtain" in the paper ".
The difference between Chinese and western cultures often makes English documents contain "Chinese characteristics ". The author of one article is very modest. At the end of the article, he analyzed the shortcomings of the proposed method and said that he will gradually overcome these shortcomings in future studies. Foreigners will not say that. They always look forward. Even if they see shortcomings, they will also say that with the in-depth research, this method will have a broader application prospect. The authors of some articles introduce China and Africa to add a "doctoral advisor" behind the "professor", so foreigners will not look like professors who are not doctoral tutors.
IX. Thesis Signature
There is no doubt that the first author of the paper should be the author. This not only reflects the respect for his work, but also has the responsibility for the article.
Many articles are written by graduate students, and the name of the mentor is behind. However, it can be seen from some articles that the mentor did not read before the submission. Even some articles have been published, and the tutor still does not know. This situation is not good. Even if the instructor has participated in the opinion before the written instruction, but does not read it after the written instruction, the tutor is not held responsible. If the student submits a contribution to the tutor's name without the knowledge of the tutor, in terms of good understanding, it is a respect for the mentor. In terms of poor understanding, there is the suspicion of "pulling the flag as a tiger skin.
Recently, there has been an increasing number of paper signatures, and even a long article contains names of five or six people. This situation is common in summative articles of a project. It is true that the idea of project participants in the research process is difficult to clearly understand, but the paper is not a work summary, and it is not likely to concentrate on the ideas of many people when writing the paper. As for the practice of writing a few more people to give people a favor or write the name of the leaders who did not participate in the work at all, it should not be promoted.
10. How to view comments on review
Generally, the delivered manuscript must go through at least one technical review, and the English manuscript has another textual review. This kind of review is usually conducted by the editorial department of a journal or magazine employing experts in the same field. The editorial department is responsible for unifying the paper format, reviewing the text, and handling the comments for the review. The reviewer is responsible for reviewing the innovation and correctness of the paper. The comments should generally include suggestions for modification to improve the quality of the manuscript.
The author should pay great attention to the review comments put forward by the reviewer first, considering why he should make these suggestions. After all, the comments of the reviewer come from the opinions of a bystander. As the saying goes, "the observer is clear." There is always a reason for his comments. Some authors think that the reviewers have not read their articles (I do not rule out this possibility), so they do not seriously consider their opinions. This is wrong. The reviewer is the first reader of the paper. If he does not understand it, the author must also consider the problems in his article so that people do not understand it. Otherwise, how can he face more readers after the article is published?
Of course, the comments on the review should also be analyzed. Although the reviewer hired by the editorial department is an expert in the same field, the reviewer may not be familiar with a specific topic studied by the author, it is not surprising to give some very pertinent opinions. Therefore, you do not have to follow the comments of the reviewer.
After the review, if you want to modify the manuscript, you must be realistic and cannot cope with the reviewer. I reviewed a paper on the drag reduction effect on the surface of the rigid hairs for a journal. I asked some questions at the first review. The author's attitude was modest, all the questions raised are justified and some modifications have been made. However, the most critical question I raised was my questions about the experiment. The author was a bit perfunctory and showed the experiment results in a different form of curve from the first draft, however, this curve obviously cannot be obtained from the previous experiment results. I have a bigger question. I will submit the question and review it after modification. In the third draft, the author changed the method and encountered more vulnerabilities. Later, this article never appeared again.
Many editorial departments adopt a double-blind mechanism for reviewing the manuscript. That is, the reviewer does not know who the author is or who the reviewer is. No matter what the starting point of this system is, I think it restricts the communication between the author and the reviewer in words. Some editorial departments even only repeat some comments of the reviewer to the author, such communication is often inadequate and may become an obstacle to improving the quality of the manuscript. Since it is learning, we should not worry about it.
Some magazines do not seem to be reviewed by the editorial department. As soon as you send the manuscript, it will say that it will be published in a certain period of time and it will be paid by the Panel. This is an irresponsible editorial department and should be far away.
When it comes to titles, the title of this article is too big. However, this article is just a casual article. Using this question is to pursue a noticeable effect, not to mention, note the things mentioned in this article to write a good paper. For example, a thesis is like a tree with its main pole and branch. The title, Introduction, experiment, and text described in this article may be part of the blade, this tree is rooted in the fertile ground of true talents. If you want to write a thesis and study it hard, increasing your knowledge is the key. The thesis is made out of painstaking efforts.