Can you be a co-author of my paper “a polynomial time algorithm for Hamilton cycle” ?
The paper and a program in VC++ see:
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/323723344_A_Polynomial_time_Algorithm_for_Hamilton_Cycle_with_maximum_Degree_3_newest_revised_of_March_2018
I studied this problem for a lot of years, I am very sure I am correct.
Some experts (referees and editor in chiefs) like to judge a paper by pre-assumption, not by careful reading, thinking and understanding. “you cannot solve such a great problem, so you have to be wrong”, if a referee reviews a paper based on such a pre-assumption, there is no way for the author.
Or, they said: the paper’s English expression is not good, so cannot follow.
Why they cannot use their brain to think deeply, to enter my train of thoughts, to discuss with me, to let me explain? Logically, my paper can be understood if you carefully read and think.
Just was rejected by a great reviewer. The reason is: this is a great problem, requires “extraordinary insights and cogent” and my paper “lacks this”.
Why the great reviewer does not pay his attention on the correctness of my algorithm, but on the nonsense “extraordinary insights and cogent”?
I can tell him that my extraordinary insight and cogent is:
There are two ways to get a Hamilton cycle in exponential time: a full permutation of n vertices; or, chose n edges from all k edges, check all possible combinations. The main problem is: how to avoid checking all combinations of n edges from all edges. My algorithm can avoid this. I do not have to consider all possible combinations of destroying edges, but for each destroying edge (with a main segment), an additional main segment only have to repeat one time. For all the paper, one only needs to understand this.
Anyway, my English is bad, I need a co-author who is strong on both English paper writing and algorithm.
Thank you very much!
Sincerely yours,
Lizhi Du
read
In a research paper with multiple authors, one author is designated as the lead author. He/she:
- Takes the overall responsibility for the manuscript
- Is usually the corresponding author i.e. someone who takes charge of getting approval from all the other authors and communicating with the journal
- Is typically the first author of the paper, which means he/she has made the most significant contribution to the research, and has also written and edited a major part of the work
Anyone else who fulfills the authorship criteria can qualify to be a co-author of the paper. According to the ICMJE guidelines, anyone who fulfils all of the following criteria can be an author:
1. Contributes significantly to the conception, design, execution, and/or analysis and interpretation of data
2. Participates in drafting and/or revising part of the manuscript for intellectual content
3. Approves of the version to be published
4. Agrees to be accountable for all aspects of the work
You might also be interested in reading
Hi professor,
I think you would understand that the reviewer need to see clearly the keys of your paper, the main key over everything.
Also I believe you can make a basic structure in order to begin the explanation, where the keys do not leave any doubt.
Of course It is not the same for the author a hard answer than a constructive answer.
Dear Javier Jiménez Delgado :
Thank you very much for your answer.
I think I did give all the key points and the most key points. All the key points and all the concepts are related, so I cannot give a key point independently.
My English expression is really not good. This affects the paper’s understanding. So I need help and need cooperators.
But I really think my paper can be understood, if one read and think deeply. If this paper is wrote by other people and I never studied Hamilton cycle, I think I can understand it by time, thinking, and deduction.
Any way, I wish co-authors who first understand it by reading it and thinking, by discussing with me and by listening my explanation, and then rewrite it to let the great reviewers understand it.
I understand your situation because I passed by It too, I had to publish in a journal with less relevance. However I hope that any great authority in my paper read It.
At the moment I received two invitations of important journals, one with interest professional and other for the next paper. The last with nobel laureates in your advisory board.
I want to say you that I had not choice, I got the long way. That is my experience.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Linguistics
- Philology
- Language
- English