What sections must be in slides presenting a core research paper and survey or review paper. What should be difference between presentation based on these two types of paper?
In the hard sciences (physics, math, computer sciences) there is a broadly accepted convention that the results stated without explicit attribution in a presentation are either common knowledge or the original results of the speaker (or the research group on whose behalf (s)he speaks).
Therefore, if you prepare a survey talk, you should exercise additional care to give proper attribution for all results, probably even for those from your group.
For a general advice on making good presentations see e.g. the book
M. Alley, The Craft of Scientific Presentations
http://www.springer.com/physics/book/978-1-4419-8278-0
Usually, in presentations a committee would be there to make decisions. Unless the committee is unbiased, all efforts become useless. A presentation may actually be a very good one, but the presenter does not usually have control over the committee, and a biased committee cannot be convinced anyway . How about dealing with this problem?
Perhaps you should look at the objectives of your paper, what are the things that you want to share... of course first one is intro, final one is conclusion or recommendation. The in-betweens will be looking at the things in your objectives. Plus, there should be some guides for authors given by the conference organiser. That should guide you in writing either types of paper.
Thanks to all.
Is it necessary to insert graphical stuff for attractive presentation in computer science ?
Dear Professor Burzynski,
In India, there are certain Government Agencies which offer Research Schemes to University Teachers.
Getting a research grant through such Government Agencies, usually for a period of three years, is not quite easy. However, for yearly renewal of the grant, the investigator has to face a Committee to show progress of the work done. The trouble, in some cases, starts herefrom. One (or two) of the members of the Committee concerned may actually express indirectly his (or their) interest to be co-author of the articles prepared from the research findings! What I mean is: without doing anything at all, such people want to be co-authors in articles. If you agree, the renewal would be smooth, otherwise such people would continue to find errors in your work, and you would not be able to renew the scheme!
Therefore I have said that however good your presentation may be, the outcome depends on the Committee that decides the matters.
I am saying this from my personal experience.
I suggest you to use the LaTex class. It is very useful.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Engineering
- Computer Engineering