 Now, what we want to discuss in this part of the session is problem solving versus problem finding, formulation of a problem, types and attributes of research problems, sources of research problems, literature survey and patents and papers. So, now the discussion on problem finding will be much shorter than we spent on problem solving, thinking and so on. This is, this should not be taken to mean that problem finding is a much less significant activity than problem solving. No, far from it as I have said, problem finding, finding a good problem for research and formulating a good hypothesis is a very, very challenging exercise. The reason why the discussion is brief because often not much can be said about this. It is something that one has to undergo, the finding of a problem is not something that can be put in a very systematic fashion and that is why the discussion is short. Though it is, though the activity is very important, it is difficult to say much, it is difficult to give guidelines, too many guidelines about it. But there are a few, students are used to well-defined problems having a single solution. They are uncomfortable with ill-defined problems. So, often many research scholars have this difficulty and they complain that their guides are not giving them a clear idea of what they should work on. In fact, some years ago there was a lecture by a Nobel Prize winner in IIT Madras and before his lecture, he actually mentioned what was his experience and how it was doing a PhD. Now, he did a PhD from a reasonably well-known American institution. So, he said when he went there and he joined for a PhD, he was shocked to see that his guide did not seem to have clear idea of what he should be working on. So, he said it is only after completing my research, I realized that you know that is the state in which any researcher is in the beginning of PhD. So, it is not possible to clearly define the problem in the beginning, because defining a problem itself is a part of the research. So, finding a problem is harder, but more essential than solving it is much is as much students responsibility as that of the guide. Now, here is some very nice statement of about problem finding. A problem must spring from a researcher's mind like a plant springing from its own seed. So, this means that a research scholar, a PhD student should spend sufficient time in finding a problem, in owning of the problem. So, unless the problem that the research scholar is pursuing has its origin in his own mind, the research scholar will not be motivated strongly enough to pursue that. So, his emotional attachment with the problem will not be strong enough. So, this is very important. So, please do not as a research scholar do not expect your guide to give you the problem and clearly define it for you. Your guide can illustrate areas and the problem in very, very broad terms, but it is your job to define merely. A just found problem is ill-defined. Its formulation as a well-defined problem is an iterative process, which may get completed only after thesis writing. So, you see all through your research, you may be modifying the statement of your research problem and ultimately it comes out in a very perfect shape only after you complete the writing of the thesis. So, it is not as though the problems are defined in the beginning few months and then you take few years to solve the problem and write up the thesis. That is not the way it is. Some more words of wisdom about problem finding. It is better to kill a little problem than to bruise a much larger one. Now, these advices are not general. So, it varies from person to person. For example, if a research scholar is very strongly motivated and has grand ideas of doing some work that will fetch a Nobel Prize or something like that, then the advice is for such a student here. This first advice. It is better to kill a little problem than to bruise a much larger one. Many times, very good scholars have this difficulty that they take up a very ambitious problem and then they find that they are not able to make much of an impact. So, for such people, this advice is made. Do not worry too much whether your problem is the best one to study. Once you go deep, any problem becomes interesting. The important thing is to get started. So, often when PhD scholars join this and at the end of one year, they start comparing their own problems with others' problems, particularly if they are facing some difficulties and things do not seem to be moving. So, this is a very important advice for students. So, any problem, if you go deep, the problem becomes interesting. So, do not do unjust comparisons. Another statement, problem finding is an autocatalytic reaction. What is the meaning of an autocatalytic reaction? In autocatalytic reaction, a product of the reaction itself catalyzes further reaction. So, there are two components A and B and the resultant is a product C. Now, once a few molecules or atoms of C are generated from the reaction, then these atoms catalyze the reaction further and then increase the rate of the reaction. So, problem finding is like that, which means once you start off and you get a small thing to work on, then as you start working, you will find more and more problems. But to go to that stage where you get at least a small problem, significant problem to work on, it may take some time. But once you have hit upon even a small problem and you start working on it, you get many more problems to work on and then you will not know which problem to choose and which one to discard. So, let us talk about getting started for your research. Ideas strike by chance, but only to a prepared mind. So, this is the important thing. So, is there an element of luck in getting good ideas? Yes, there is an element of luck or chance, but it is very important, even that luck will come only to a prepared mind. Now, what is the meaning of a prepared mind? So, we will try to give some guidelines on how to prepare your mind. Now, only a prepared mind can follow a lead opened by an observation, which is too insignificant to attract the attention of common man. So, to prepare the mind, do the following, cyclically. Cyclically means, you know, one after the other simultaneously, you can even use the word simultaneously if you want here. So, reading, that is literature survey, implementing someone else's work and thinking about some doubts that you get when you do reading and implement someone else's work. So, the important thing to note here is that research is not like first doing only literature survey for a few months and then getting into the next stage and so on. Many things have to start simultaneously. So, here what is suggested is, supposing you have identified an area and you have started reading literature, it is not a good idea to just keep on reading without doing anything. So, now, what can you start on? Because you have not yet found a problem for research, what you can do is, when you read, you will come across some implementations of some ideas, when you read some papers. Now, you try to replicate those things yourself. So, suppose somebody has given a derivation of a particular solution, you go through the derivation yourself, do the derivation yourself. Somebody has done some simulation and given some results, if you have the facility, you try to repeat the simulations for the same data that is given in the paper and see whether you get the same result. Someone has done an experiment and got some data, if you have the apparatus, you repeat that experiment. So, repeating what somebody else has done is a good starting point. Now, this should be done parallely with reading. So, you read for some time, then sometime you spend in implementing someone else's work, then again you come back and read and then you think about some doubts, which you may be getting or difficulties that you may face in the course of this. So, to repeat, only reading is not a good starting point. You must do something. Now, this I will not spend much time. Dr. Sukath may in fact, steps in finding a problem and formulating a hypothesis, he is put down exactly the same steps. What I will do is, I will give you an example of how a hypothesis gets formulated. So, broadly these are the steps. First, a very general vague statement, then there may be some ambiguities that you resolve, then thinking and rephrasing. So, this is an iterative process. So, you try to resolve ambiguities and for doing so, you may have to think and rephrase, restate the your problem and so on. And this you will go, you may spend some time doing this iteratively and then finally comes out a clear concise manageable statement. As I mentioned already, the time period from a general statement and finally, a clear concise manageable statement can be the start of the PhD work and thesis writing, end of thesis writing. So, you know, it can be that long or alternately the clarity in your statement may come well before you start writing your thesis, but you should not be surprised if even during thesis writing, you know, you modify your statement and you are still trying to make it clear and concise. So, let me take an example of how you make a hypothesis precise starting with a general statement. Suppose there is someone who is doing research on comparing the productivity in Japan with the productivity in India. Now, just talking about productivity is vague. Evidently, we are talking about industrial productivity that is clear, but then productivity of which kind of products that is very important. So, this is how you start making the statement more and more precise. So, first step could be that you limit the duration in which you are going to study this relative productivity. For instance, here you can restrict yourself to a 10 years span 1971 to 1980. So, productivity of manufacturing industries you compare during a particular duration. So, you restrict the duration, you specify that I am going to study for this duration to make the statement more precise and then you might find that, you know, productivity in let us say Japan was higher than in India and you want to give reasons for it why this was there and so on. Now, what form of productivity? So, here you are making the statement more precise. You say it is labour productivity and then what kind of industries? So, you select some 15 areas of industries that you want to compare. You cannot compare an industry which is producing automobiles with an industry which produces semiconductor products. So, you have to compare industries in the same area. So, that is the next thing that you are doing here. Labour productivity of 15 selected manufacturing industries was higher in Japan than in India during 1971 to 1980. This is the hypothesis that you are formulating. Of course, you have to justify your hypothesis that comes later. This is another method of another example. You can go through this example yourself. I will just leave it to you. So, type of research problem. One of the persons who made presentation in the morning did, you know, talk about this little bit. So, I will just leave this. I think and professor Sukath may also mentioned about types of problems. Now, this is an important slide. How do you know that your problem is a good one to work on? So, what criteria you must use to assess your research problem? So, one dimension is difficulty. Is your, is the problem you have chosen difficult enough for you to you know, spend 3 or 4 years of your time? Next, does it have value or is it useful? Third aspect. So, what I am discussing is not necessarily in that order, right? Originality. Is the kind of work that you do, would it be original or would it be something that other people have done? The methodology you are adopting and so on. Then, is it interesting? Now, note that, you know, a problem may be sufficiently difficult. It may be original, but not necessarily interesting. So, interesting is another dimension. So, a problem becomes interesting if it goes contrary to what people normally believe. For instance, we discussed an example of research in area of obesity. And then, we said that researcher, you know, showed with the help of an experiment that it is the external factor such as availability of food that dictates the eating habits of fat people than any internal factor. Now, people normally tend to believe that the factors which are responsible for overeating are internal to the people. So, here is something interesting. Somebody is saying, no, the factors are external. So, then it becomes more interesting. Significance and impact. So, now, this particular thing is may be difficult to judge. Exactly, how much impact will a research work have? May be difficult to judge, but at least we can ensure and we can see that these dimensions difficulty, usefulness, originality and interest, whether the problem is interesting or not. We can check on these and we hope that if a problem has all these dimensions, it is likely to make impact. But still, the level of impact may not be possible to judge. In this context, I want to give an example. So, it is true of all creative works that it may be difficult to judge its impact, prejudge the impact of your creative work. A famous music director was once asked this question as to which he regarded as his best compositions, ten best compositions. Now, and which are these compositions in which he spent lot of time, time and effort. Now, it turned out that only six of those compositions were actually musical hits in the public mind. This was a film music director. So, in terms of impact, only six of the ten compositions that the composer felt, he had spent lot of time on made impact. And interestingly, he said that some of the songs which became hits, he had not spent much time at all. And they were composed, you know, just maybe over a few days and it was completely a surprise to note that these songs made impact. So, this is true of all creative activity that it may be difficult to judge the impact. But at least we must make effort to see that the other dimensions, difficulty, usefulness, value, originality and interesting nature we should ensure. And finally, any problem that you choose, I mentioned this in the context of answering a question by one of the participants on, you know, whether he should work on nano machining or not. So, cost equipment and cooperation, we must also assess this particular aspect. For instance, there may be a research scholar who is not very comfortable dealing with a large number of people for getting things done. In which case, if he chooses a problem for which he has to frequently go and take the help of others, in doing experiments, in getting things done in different laboratories and so on, he may find it difficult. So, if it does not suit his personality, then, you know, you must choose an appropriate problem which suits the personality. But more than that, I would say the cost and equipment is a major consideration. So, all these things should be taken into account before choosing a problem. So, sources of interesting research, explanation of an anomaly, solution of a contradiction, transplantation of ideas and explanation from one context to another. These are three types of research which will, which ultimately become interesting. So, explanation of an anomaly. So, what is an anomaly? So, for instance, you know that taking an example from a simple example for electrical engineering, if you increase the voltage across a device, then the current increases. Now, supposing you come across a characteristics, a set of characteristics in which the current decreases when you increase the voltage. Now, this is an anomalous behavior, right, does not conform to commonly seen pattern. Now, such a thing, if you choose for your research and you can explain, assuming that others have not explained, then, you know, it can be interesting. Now, a contradiction. Again, taking the example from electrical engineering, for example, my area of semiconductor devices. Normally, if you try to increase the power rating of the device, the device will become much slower. It will not respond quickly to any changes in voltage or current. So, the more power a device has to support or manage, the slower is its speed. So, there is a contradiction between power and speed. Now, if you come up with a device, a new device in which it manages the same amount of power as a conventional device, but it does so, its speed is much higher. Then, you know, it is likely to be interesting. The research is likely to be interesting. Now, similarly, a transplantation of ideas and explanations from one context to another. So, we gave some examples. This is nothing but analogy and we gave an example of developing a model for an atom from the knowledge of the solar system and applying the similar ideas in different situations. So, this can also make your research interesting. Now, here are a few more sources of research problems. When you are doing literature search, you must look at the future work sections in thesis and papers. Then, you must interact with experienced researchers in the field and also engage in, you know, teaching, explaining, answering doubts and so on. Comparing different approaches by some objective measures of efficiency or accuracy. So, you are coming across different approaches of doing the same thing in literature. Compare these approaches and that can give you some research problems to work on. Some other things are also given here. They are self-explanatory. You can go through this slide. All these statements are self-explanatory here. Now, let me spend, may be in the next 5 or 10 minutes, I will close this about literature survey. So, we will try to answer why literature survey, what to read, how much to read, how to read and the importance of note-taking in the context of literature survey. Now, why you should do literature survey? To know sufficiently enough to identify gaps, this is well known. So, I will not discuss on this. But, this is important. To know the views and interest of others in a topic. Now, supposing you want to choose a topic for your research and you want to know whether it will be relevant, whether it will be interesting to others, whether it will be useful, rather interesting, I have already discussed how a problem becomes interesting and so on. Then, it is good to see the publications. Now, if no publications are coming in that area in recent years, may be it means that that problem is not of interest. This cannot be generalized beyond a point, but by and large this is true. So, how do you know or what do you mean by recent years? Normal practice is to look for the last 5 years as a guideline and see whether any publications are coming in the area in the last 5 years. Another important thing to know and establish contact with people who may be interested in your work. So, after PhD, you may like to do a postdoc. So, you would not like to know where you can go, what are the options available. To know if others have already done what you want to do, to integrate and compare various ideas on a topic to get hints on how to tackle a problem. Now, the sources, what to read? So, you should read journal papers, patents, research reports, conference proceedings and thesis. These are the various things that you can read. Some other sources are also written here, the self-explanatory. How much to read? Now, this is a question that many research scholars have, that are they reading sufficiently enough? Start with articles published recently and go back to about 5 years earlier. Now, this is the approach you should take. In order to understand the articles which are published in the last 5 years, you may have to read literature which is published much earlier. So, that you may have to do, but your starting point is last 5 years. That is what is important. So, that you remain current in whatever work you are doing. Read and think alternately. Do not spend eternity on literature survey. Start doing your own thinking early. One has to start in a state of partial ignorance and this has advantage that you are free from prejudice which suppresses new ways of doing things. Reading should continue throughout the research process. Sometimes what happens is, research scholars do literature survey for few months, then they hit upon a problem to work on and when they are working on a problem, they forget about literature survey. So, they work for a couple of years and then they find that they have done work which they feel they can publish and at that point, they do literature survey again and they find that same problem has been tackled by somebody else. So, unless you keep scanning the literature continuously, you will get into these difficulties. How to read? I think on this topic also, something was told earlier. The important point to note here is the last point made here. One can read word by word, line by line, paragraph by paragraph, chapter by chapter or even book by book. Now, this is an important statement. In fact, this statement let me illustrate a small anecdote about this. Once Swami Vivekananda took a book from a library and he returned it back within a week. It was a fairly fat book. So, the librarian asked whether did you read this book or you just scanned a few pages and you are returning back. So, he said he is read the book. He said it is not possible. How can someone read such a fat book? And this was the answer he gave. So, he said people can read word by word, line by line, paragraph by paragraph or even chapter by chapter and to put it more dramatically, book by book. So, what it means is a small child normally reads, puts a finger under each letter and that is how he or she reads a word. And then as you grow, you start reading one word at a time and so on. And then as you develop your reading habit, you can even read line by line, quickly the whole line you read. It does not mean that you read every word, but you see a set of words and then you get the gist. So, sometimes if you are a very experienced reader, even by looking at a few lines, you can get the gist of a few lines together. Now, this is the ability that you have to develop. You cannot read word by word. If you use that kind of an approach, you cannot read so many papers that you have to read. So, you must learn to quickly get a gist of whatever you are reading. Now, that is where you have to first scan. So, scanning can involve the following. You look at the title, look at the abstract, look at the conclusion and look at the figures. Figures are very important. You can read by figures alone what is happening in a paper. Then what you should do is you must highlight whenever you are reading the few points that you have come across and so that you can read those highlighted points in detail if there is a necessity. On internet, a lot of material is available on how to develop good reading skills. So, how to read fast? So, you can do an literature search on this and you will get lot of ideas. In fact, this thing is very effectively demonstrated to students. I remember one instance where in one of my group meetings, I had asked a student to present some information and this student presented information, he drew a diagram of some setup. I wanted dimensions of some particular device that he had drawn. He said he made, you know, he read the paper two or three times, but he did not get the dimensions that I was asking for. I asked him that, you know, how did you read? He said, sir, I have read the complete paper line by line. I asked him for the paper and then it took me only a minute to locate the place where actually the dimensions were provided. So, the student was surprised, but how is it possible? Now, this is what is important. If you try to read word by word, you might get tired. Your mind may get tired because of monotony. In the beginning and by the time you come to a point where actually you have to, you know, concentrate, you will not be able to concentrate. So, you must know what kind of an information is available in which location in a paper and you must try to search around that place rather than reading the whole paper to locate this. So, note taking, a few points among note taking, these are also explained here. It is very important to keep notes when you are doing literature survey because when you read fifty papers for instance after four or five months and then you want to go back to some paper in which some idea was presented, you will not know which paper it was. So, if you make a proper note keeping important information about the references, noting that also against an idea that you have read, then it can be a great help. May be I will have a few minutes of interaction. Let us take whale seniority, can I? I want to convey some message to the participants, that is, here we are seeing that so many participants are doing research and they want to do the research so that I want to convey some message. That is, most of the people are thinking that the PhD is the only way to do the research. That is not like that. That is, when we want to do PhD, then before that itself we have to start the research work. Then only we can finish it in time and also it is it should be a efficient one. And also so many people are thinking that the area of choosing will be a guidance given by some other persons. That is not like that. Whatever we had done and whatever we had studied in our UD and PG, in that we will get some idea or interest in that, that has to be extended as a research and then they can register for PhD. That is the message I want to convey so that when they are, that is all, sir. Let me make minor revisions in what you have said. Though it is true that you prepare yourself for research by doing your bachelor's and master's, but the exact problem you want to work on, you may get an idea of this only when you do literature survey of journal papers by and large. Sometimes you may get a very good doubt based on what has been taught in the class and that may be good enough for a research problem, but often unless you do that kind of a literature survey of journal papers where other research work is published. Journal papers are not the, really the places where latest research is talked about. So that is a... For choosing our broad area, we can get idea from our UD and PG. After choosing the broad area, in order to find out the, this problem or the problem finding, we can go for journals or some other papers like that. Yes. The question is, yesterday there was a suggestion that once you formulate the problem, you give a seminar, but I have a feeling that, won't it result in some, there is a risk involved in that. Say for example, suppose you finalize a problem and then you decide how you are going to proceed. Somebody else who is working in the similar area can get this idea and then why not we take this idea and then do research. Over to you sir. Now, this problem can be easily overcome by choosing appropriate people in your seminar. You choose people who are in your same area, but will not. For example, in a research group, two people will not do the same problem. Definitely not. They will have different problems to work on, though the area may be the same. That is one point. Second point is, we must also introspect whether this fear is our own kind of nature to be suspicious or whether there is any real truth in it. Are there people around who will really steal your idea? Many times what happens is, we may be suspicious. Actually, people may not be interested in stealing an idea. But you are right. Sometimes it can happen. So, seminar does not necessarily mean a broadcast to the whole world. Seminar means, it is an occasion for you to speak about your work. As we said, there is a link between speaking all these activities like speaking, writing and so on. So, speaking about your work, writing about your work, it stimulates thinking. Plus, comments made by others will definitely add much more stimulus to new ideas. So, you will lose the benefit of that. So, that is the point that is being made. So, that is a very significant loss, I would say. So, if it is possible, you should definitely give seminars on your work. What is your thing you propose to do? Suppose you presented some conference, this idea in some conference, then you can claim that this is your own work so that you can proceed there. And after that, can you give a presentation? Won't it be more effective? Yes, yes. See, I think there are different types of seminars. Seminars are given for different reasons. When it was suggested that you give a seminar in the beginning of your research, the goal of that seminar is different. Goal of that seminar is to, let us say, firm up your own ideas about what you are doing because when you speak formally about your work, you spend time in arranging your ideas. That is one benefit you get. Plus, to get some input from others who are, you know, friendly and but at the same time critical. What they say feel about the problem that you are working on. A conference seminar, on the other hand, unless you are prepared up to some level and you have done some level of contribution, you cannot make a conference presentation. So, the type of seminar that was suggested was to get benefit in formulating your problem and to just assess whether you are in the right direction. So, a seminar given at the conference, its purpose is different. Similarly, a seminar given before submitting a thesis after you have made journal publications and conference publications. That seminar has even a different purpose. There, the purpose of the seminar is to announce your contributions to people. So, seminars are given with different purpose. The first type of seminar is for your benefit, not for the benefit of the audience. It is for your benefit. So, Phongu Engineering College, Perundurai, Eeroad. I am doing my research in humanities. I am just wanting to measure the nervousness of students since it is in humanities. And I have prepared a new scale of analysis. I would like to know what are the factors that I can add in order to validate my scale. I have just gone through existing papers which have also validated their scales. And I feel that whether my research and the factors that I have considered so far for validating that scale would be of value or would not be of that much valuable. So, I need your opinions and what are the factors that I can consider to validate my new scale, which may be acceptable to others also. See, now, just coincidence. One of the slides that I had on hypothesis is related to nervousness among students. It is just a coincidence. But more than that, I have no acquaintance with this field. Let me go back to that slide. So, it is about link between the learning capability and nervousness in students. So, the hypothesis says average learners are less nervous because they are average. So, there is a correlation. You find that average learners are not so nervous. Now, you want to know why it is so and you want to frame a hypothesis for working in this area. So, how this hypothesis can be made more precise? So, towards the end, for example, finally, a hypothesis that can be tested because the hypothesis should be testable. Read something like this. The students at IIT Madras having an IQ score on the WBA intelligence scale within the range of 90 to 110 have low percentile ranks on the subscores of a personality inventory than a like group of students having a total IQ score less, greater than 120. In other words, the average learning has been defined in terms of the IQ score because you have to define. You know, what do you mean by an average learner? So, some quantitative figures have to be given. Now, when you want to generate these numbers, you have to define the kind of test because different tests can give you different numbers and then based on these numbers, you say that high learners are those who get a score of more than 120 and maybe, you know, poor learners are those who get a score of less than maybe 80 or something like that. So, this is how hypothesis becomes testable and clear, suitable for pursuing in research. I think more than that, I have nothing to add to, you know, to what you have asked me, but it is an interesting problem to work on. So, many problems in humanities, particularly in psychology are of great interest to everybody, though everybody cannot give suggestions on the kind of research problems that you are talking about. If asking whether is it enough to depend on questions or we have to go for an interview. No, interview is, see, you can get a written response or you can try to study, you can record the responses to some stimuli, right, in interactions. You can also make measurements, like you measure the blood pressure, you know, you take the heartbeat. There can be some parameters which you can measure, probably you can use such measures also. So, that is all what I can say. Sir, do you have time for one more question? Yeah, please go ahead. Sir, this is a issue which you are talking just quite a while ago. It is about the originality of the work. Suppose I am doing a work in a particular area and after sometime I am seeing the same kind of work as a product. In what way I can prove the originality of my work? I mean the genuineness of my work. You said that we can give a seminar. If at all I have not given a seminar, in what way I can prove my originality? Okay, let me reframe what you have said. You are saying that you started working on something and then at some point you, when you are reading some literature in your area, you found somebody else is pursuing similar kind of work, right? Now, what happens to whatever effort you have put in? How does it remain original? Now, this sort of a feeling can happen. Many people get into this situation. It is not at all an uncommon situation because so many people all over the world are simultaneously working on similar areas, right? Therefore, the ability lies in seeing what are the differences in your approach and the approach adopted by the other person. See, fortunately there are many things common among people but there are many things which are unique. So, normally whenever we do independent thinking, there is some element of uniqueness in whatever we think about even though the matter that we think about may be similar to what other person is doing. So, it depends on the ability, your ability as well as your guides ability to see which aspect of your work is novel. You can always find something that is different from the other person. So, it is that ability that normally helps in such situations in identifying the where exactly the originality is there. So, some things may you may find which is that they are common. But if you do a careful analysis of your approach and that person's approach, you will find that some aspect you know you may be better than the other person. So, this is where again productive thinking looking at your own work from different angles and other person's work also from different angles is important. Only when you look from many different angles you will develop discover the strength of your work. So, repeat many researchers get into this kind of a situation because there are many people are working in the same area and you should not get a shock if you know get into this sort of a situation. You must think about your problem deeply and in different ways and you will be able to identify some uniqueness because inherently people are different fortunately in some respect or the other. One face does not resemble the other face. Similarly, one mind does not think in the same way as the other mind. So, you must bank on this particular law of nature. What is the correct time to write a journal paper? Whether after getting the result or whether getting after getting the observations from our result of our work. That is after getting the result or after getting some of the observation from our work. I have to reframe your question because it is not clear in the way manner you have asked but before that I just want to say something in a later way. I thought you are saying what is the right time to close for the day. So, I was thinking that that is what you are going to say. So, we will take your question and then we will close for the day. Now, let us answer your question. What you seem to be implying is you have done an experiment and you have collected some data. Now, after you have got the data, is it the right time to write a paper? I do not know what you mean by observation and result. So, I am assuming that you mean by result interpretation of the data because the data itself or the observations themselves can be regarded as result. So, I do not know what you mean by these words. I am assuming that you have collected some data and then whether this is the right time to write a paper or whether you must explain the data and so on and get some conclusions and then write a paper. What of it is executed? After that, can I write a paper? That is what. It is not clear what you mean by part of what is executed. So, okay. That is one of a module, one or two module is executed, whether shall I write a paper based on that results? Look, see, general guideline is like this. You can, you write a paper whenever you feel that you have something that is significant. For example, supposing you have come, you have synthesized a new material and let us say you are measuring the conductivity of the new material. Now, you get some value. Nobody else has measured the conductivity of that material and nobody has reported the value. Now, in such a situation, even that value that you have obtained, though you are not able to explain how you get that value itself can be significant. You can probably write a short paper on reporting that you have measured this conductivity and this is the value that you have got and it is something very unusual. So, if something unusual is there, you can report. On the other hand, if the value that you get is not very significant, then it is not the right time to report. You must probably do more work on it, you know, get an explanation for that value and when you try to derive an explanation, suppose you find that some new phenomena are taking place in the material or the device, which others have not reported, then those phenomena which are new, according to you, may be worth reporting. So, the point is, I think you should look at it from the point of significance of whatever you have got at any point of time. If whatever you have got is significant, it is new, it is of interest, then it can be reported. That is the stage at which you write paper, understand? So, you should not have the guideline for writing a paper as follows. I have done two years some work, okay, I will write one paper, then after another two years, I will write another paper, okay, that is not the way people decide to write papers. So, some people may write a paper within the first year if they got something significant. Some other people may work for four years and only then write papers. They may write four papers after four years, all four papers, one after the other, but at the end of a four year period, because they have done work for four years and you know, they have set up apparatus, then they have got some observations and they have got the explanations for them and then only they start writing papers, okay. So, there is no hard and fast rule about this timing. The guideline is is it something significant new, then only you write. So, we are closing for the day.