My research is going on Traffic analysis , Prediction and Intelligent Transport System. I have good concept in theory but I found that most of the papers are not elaborated experiments setup and result graphs with their theory so I want to get suggestion from you that which is the best way to present paper in theoretical or experimental related to my research (ITS).
Is there any predefined rules in writing scientific Research paper.
In phd research, 60-70% is a strong theoretiacal model. As our framework, model, data and other related artifacts of research come from theory. Then we verify our model with data analysis, data verification, experimentation and observations. So a strong theory serves as the base for new research, thats why most of the papers are theoratical. In computer science, we have to verify our model with our data and model and this is only possible after a very good research and understanding of theory. Start with a strong theoretical concept , do a plenty of research from literature and then realize your model, alrogithms and data from experimentations. I think that will be best for you!
Niranjan Khakurel A research paper should provide enough information about the methodology that another research can reproduce and verify the results, even if collecting new data. This must include both the data collection and data analysis methods.
In my experience, many papers I have reviewed are heavy on methodology and findings but the "discussion" section is superficial. My outline for a research paper is below. It is geared to social science research, but you may find some value in it.
Method Research Study Manuscript Outline
Experimental papers tend to be of local value, whereas theoretical papers, such as modelling, can be applied over larger scales
99% of the knowledge you need to get a PhD going is in 1% of the 1000 PDFs on your desktop. How many do you have? How many have you annotated? (use Qiqqa)
My PhD on traffic was ultimately centred in the untested theory in 2 contradictory papers. (A) was a renown international conference paper in a colleague's bottom drawer of his filing cabinet.The other (B) was in a respected Journal in a departmental library. (B) was the easy one to find. As I remember, one suggested 5 equations (M, N, O, P, Q) The other suggested 3 (X , N, Z). I proved theoretically and empirically that only N was sound and also that it was supported on a network where I gathered nearly 5 million Origin-Destination 'trips' (calls). In the process, I also disproved the so-called gravity model.
Since you study is on prediction would better if it has theoretical base and modeling data in your review so you could as much grasp the difference in methodology and results . Likewise, research gaps are good to note looking more into the gaps in methodology should you wish to look for one which is more suited for the study. In the end, what should jive are your problem statements and methodology
Research has to be dedicated to finding new ways of achieving results in quick time
Kalpathy Ramaiyer Subramanian Three quick letters QRS =
Qiqqa, ResearchGate, Scholar.
Hi!
I Agree with the fact that a strong PhD is based on a strong theory, but ultimately, I think you are in charge of your work and only you understand the important role of a methodology in your work, so if you're not happy with little information you found on the experiments and results why don't you try contacting some of the previous researchers you are interested with and try to discuss it with them? See how important really their work has been for them on those aspects? I mean after all, we do have platforms such as researchgate for this? right? If I were you , I would do that.
Good luck!
Thank You Atefeh Zamani for answer. But focus both at same time is crucial to me. Highly appreciate your answer.Thank You.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Methodology
- Research Methodology
- Research Papers