 So, warm welcome to all of you and hope that we will have a very fruitful interaction both today and in two weeks. Professor Fartak started of his introduction by saying that this kind of workshop is something that is required or that might be required for a variety of people starting from people who are just fresh out of college and have started getting into the research game as well as experienced people who have say already published papers and are still doing a lot of research. So, one thing that we have found that helps a variety of this entire range of people is a lot of hands-on interaction along with some general tips and tricks on how to write clearly. So, the main goal of this workshop or the main goals let me say of this workshop two weeks from now would be to get people to think clearly, organize their thoughts and get a logical flow with sound content into their paper. The way we would so getting towards the next two weeks what we will do today is as follows and I believe most of you would have gotten an email from our team last evening telling you about the schedule. Since the actual workshop is a hands-on where we will contain a lot of hands-on activity we thought that we will incorporate a large part of that even in today's meeting. So, I will just tell you about the schedule today. I know a lot of you have raised hands let me start backwards. We will have a lot of time both in the middle and towards the end to answer your questions about what is going to happen in two weeks time and what is your role and so on. But what I would do is schedule that session towards the end of today's meeting so that many of the questions that you might have perhaps would already become clear within these two hours. What we would start with is actually by discussing the paper and the assignment that was posted yesterday because that would give you a feel of how we would be conducting this activity in two weeks time. So, what I would suggest now is we will first take up a discussion of the paper and your responses to the assignment that is the first thing we will do. We might take a short break depending on how much time we have and then I will walk you through the actual schedule of the workshop on the 18th and 19th. The day by day schedule, the hour by hour schedule what we will be doing and what you will be doing that is going to be the second part of today's meeting. And the third part of today's meeting will be an open question and answer from where you can ask your questions about the logistic excuse me about the technical details of the workshop. So, if that is ok with everybody what I will do is visit you one by one and request you to give to say your response to the posted assignment. There was a paper that was posted and what you were supposed to do is read it and answer two questions. Question one was if you were the referee of this paper would you accept this paper as it is or would you suggest modifications or would you reject it? I am not asking you for what modifications you would suggest. I am all we are asking you is to make a decision and please say your top reason just one top reason for why you would accept it or reject it. What we would do at the end of this discussion is I will collate all your answers and we will build a list of good features or good aspects that a paper must have and we will use that as material for the actual workshop from two weeks from now. So, when I visit you and ask for your responses right now please limit your responses to the assignment itself. If you have not had a chance to look at the paper you can actually look at the paper right now in real time and perhaps give your responses. Sastra University good morning. Ma'am actually I am the remote center coordinator my workshop coordinator is not feeling well. So, please send me the username and password for the Moodle because my password is not working there I have already sent a mail. Okay, thank you for your comments we will do that. Kolhapur Institute of Technology good morning over to you. Hello I am Dr. Mesh Chauhan a workshop coordinator still I have not received any Moodle ID and password I am expecting that because I am not getting that paper related to that assignment. Okay, then we look into it right now Dr. Chauhan please hold on over and out. Sree Jaycham Rajendra College good morning over to you. This is the remote center coordinator Anand Murthy. Namaste I am B. Apramayaswara workshop coordinator I have sent an email to get the password and ID for the Moodle please. Okay, if you have already sent the email to get the ID and password we will send it to you as soon as possible we are working on it right now thank you over and out. Walshan College Sangli good morning over to you. Good morning I am Dr. Momen from Walshan College I am working at the workshop coordinator. Sree Jaycham in this workshop any specific instruction for a workshop coordinator apart from this paper submission regarding this recursion etc are you going to give any instruction in this workshop today's workshop yes today's workshop the first part of today's workshop I would like to hear from you your views of what constitutes a good paper. So for that what we are going to do is what I would like you to do is read the paper and very specifically with regard to the paper give us one reason or one feature that you see that you think is either good or can be improved. Using your responses we will then have a presentation say in about half an hour on what are the good features of a paper and that will be the instructions. So there will be a lot more instructions coming but I wanted to get started with an activity. So this is this message is for everybody please read the paper and write down one reason why you think you want to either accept the paper or reject the paper over to you Walshan. Ok madam ok thank you ok thank you thank you over and out and now university good morning have you been able to download the assignment over. I have to send the request for ID and password and waiting for the password to receive. Yesterday I couldn't check today morning when I checked the mail and send the ID and the password request and waiting for the reply. Ok we will get back to you right away over and out and now. Eeroad good morning have you been able to download the paper and assignment. I have downloaded the paper I got the modal password ID everything I downloaded the paper and downloaded the questions I will soon send my feedback immediately. Ok thank you over and out. VIT Pune good morning do you have a response to the paper over to you. Yeah yeah yes I have already answered the questions for that paper. Could you please tell us we are able to hear you very well VIT Pune could you please share with us one of your responses over to you. But I observed that the first need the title of the project title of the paper that means you just give some importance to the requirement of the talent and accordingly you can modify that particular also some also some editing corrections like caption of the table should be at the top of the table which is table 2, table 3, table 4. Ok thank you very much VIT over and out. K.J. Somaya good morning have you been able to respond to the assignment. Yeah yesterday evening I have downloaded my assignment I have prepared my answer can I share it with you madam over and above. Yes please share it with us over to you. Yeah my answer to the assignment will be the option be that I will accept the paper with some modifications and the justification I would like to put it like this the first justification will be the research problem is well defined and is relevant there is a continuity of the like ideas or continuity of the work from within the adjacent sections section A, B, C, D etc. The implementation of the idea is given very clearly and the idea is support well supported by the result. That is my answer to the first part yes I will accept the paper. The second will be the validation is I feel the title of the paper is slightly misleading so title can be changed it is a very minor suggestion and some of the references means more references were required when it is said that some rubrics are used for the assessment so that is like more elaboration of that idea or more references for that will be useful and the feasibility of the like implementation of this idea for other subject. In this paper it is given for the Java like data structures using the Java but for the other engineering like mechanical electrical electronics this whether the same concept can be implemented that is a well that should be thought that should have been thought over or more dwelling on that should have been done this is what I feel over and above thanks a lot. Thank you very much for your valuable comments Professor Jayashree and I will come back to a number of pertinent points that you have made at the end of this discussion. Thank you over and out Rajlakshmi Engineering College good morning have you been able to read the paper and respond over to you. Of course we have downloaded the paper as mentioned earlier the title is not incoherent but then the paper is discussing an important issue I prefer to accept the paper and I suggest some modification to be made for example the caption of the tables references made for example figure 3 and figure 6 they are not referred to the text anywhere in the body body of the paper so such modifications are to be required. Thank you very much for your comments Rajlakshmi Engineering College we will incorporate your responses in the discussion as soon as we finish visiting the other colleges over and out. I am Dr. Kaleem Fatima we have just downloaded the paper and I would like to just make a few comments that we I could not read the paper we have just downloaded it and there are some visible in appropriations in the structure of the paper this is what I could do for example everybody has commented on table captions it has to be about the table and introduction is always the first you know it has to be number one it is number two normally abbreviations problem statement they are all part of the theses and I have not seen them as part of the you know as a paper so abbreviations and problem statement normally we mention them we define them in the theses we do not define them in the in introduction itself you know you give the previous paper background and you talk about your own paper then also there is a heading called an example I think this also is a little inappropriate in my view and the figure is at the end of the paper after the references this is also inappropriate and there are many gaps in the paper I think there should be no gaps at the end and at the beginning one of the and also in section notes one of A, B, C, D have been given I have to check you know they have been repeated in every section section three and four both have got A, B, C, D so I find in appropriations in the structure of the paper initially to comment. Thank you very much let me respond to one of the comments you made right now and I will come back to most of the comments once again after we finish the discussion. You mentioned that certain sections such as problem statement may not be may not be appropriate for a paper what happens is this such decisions often are are different depending on the domain and the culture within a particular conference in certain domains it might be perfectly acceptable to have it within a paper itself and in certain other domains or sometimes even in certain communities within a domain say sub domain or a small topic of a subject it might be very common practice to have certain sections within the paper itself. So, one thing we will be doing in the main workshop two weeks from now is try to separate try to tell you what is common and what is absolutely crucial within papers written for any domain and also try to separate issues that might be typical or pertinent only to a certain domain. We did not restrict teachers only from a certain stream certain topic or certain subject. So that you might find certain aspects which are appropriate for your subject and not for others. So, it was a valid point that you made and I did want to mention this later we will come back to this point. Thank you very much over and out. Amal Jyothi college do you have a response to the paper over to you? I just downloaded the paper and I am going through the paper I am not able to make any comments right now. Okay, thank you we will come back to you over and out. NIT Warangal good morning do you have a response to the paper over? This is professor Bivya for a coordinator we have not yet received this Moodle ID password only after that we can give over. Have you sent us an email about this over? Yeah just now our colleague has gone and contacted over phone for the email ID password Moodle ID password and he has just received he is downloading the paper now. We will come back to you again thank you over and out. Nirma University good morning do you have a response to the paper? I am Prenka Sharma calling from Nirma University I just had a look at the papers and the title as everyone mentions needs to be a little more appropriate with respect to the content which is covered in the paper and apart from that there are various formatting related problems that I have identified the first one is that some of the figures are too much stretched and that reduces the readability of the text which is in the paper then in one of the figures I think figure number one implementation word has not been written as one then the captions of table are not properly mentioned the top and bottom spacing of the figures are not the same in all the cases as for example in case of figure two the top margin is very little and the text is almost sticking to the border of the figure then the few then as far as okay the justifications you know in some cases is not appropriate like on the second page almost from the last if you see the third paragraph not justified well then one more thing is this paper basically enhances more towards learning by doing and with respect to that they have picked up a case study and they are highlighting one specific case so I cannot comment much on the on the case that has been covered over here but if you see the references then I feel some of the there could have been more references as well as the formatting which is done on references is not appropriate not uniform there is no mention of the detail of websites which have been referred in the references section which we normally do in paper writing then the future work that is written could be could be more appropriate. Thank you very much for valuable comments we will come back to all these points right now I request everybody to keep their comments to maybe one or two reasons for why they want to accept the paper or not because a lot of comments are as you might have noticed in the last 10 minutes are being noticed by many of your colleagues and that is a very good thing because we are trying to put together this pool of knowledge together so I request all of you to limit your comments to one or at most two we will come back to you give all of your chance to speak again thanks very much over and out. Amritha Bangalore good morning do you have a response to the paper over to you Dr. Pradeep from Amritha School of Engineering Bangalore I have gone through the paper and according to me the paper is perfectly acceptable except for a few corrections the flow is quite nice and there are no spelling mistakes and the only thing is the figures are to be arranged properly I can see one figure at the end of the after the references and only thing is in the conclusion part we have the words such as our and we have been used those things should be avoided only that other than that it is perfectly acceptable. Thank you Amritha Bangalore let me make one more comment at this point as you might have noticed from what your colleagues have been saying some of the points are being noticed by everybody for example there are some grammar and formatting errors mainly formatting errors figures table captions and so on. So, almost all of you have noticed it. So, what I request the rest of the faculty members that we will be visiting in a moment to try to find out something that has not yet been noticed by everybody. For example, let me give you some hints at this point please pay a little more attention to the logical flow of the paper can you find the question easily are the solution methods that the paper using are they answering the actual question that has been posed and so on. You are very correct that the writing style and grammar needs to be improved and we have spent a lot of time on that. So, I request everybody to try to look beyond it for the rest of the colleges that we will be visiting in a moment. Thank you Amritha over and out. Walchin College Sangli good morning we did visit you some time ago do you have a response on the paper over to you. What happened we did not this any model ID or we did not have any idea from where to download. So, we could not participating this discussion. So, can you please give me some guidelines so that we can download the paper and give the email ID over to you. We are sending it right now Walchin. So, if you will check your email in a few minutes you should be able to see a response from our side. Thank you. NGR Institute Udaipur good morning do you have a response to the paper. So, I am ready to accept this paper but only with improvements. So, I have seen like there's been like if you see the tables they are not in proper like in columns if you see they are not properly the words are not proper in order and even in diagrams it has to be like proper like in fonts and even the representation and even the the labing of the rows and columns in them. If you talk about the content in the flow of work like say when we talk about said results there's like no proper numbering which can conclude what the paper wants to really reach to a level. Thank you for your comments NGR Udaipur especially if the last one we will come back to it in the main discussion over and out. YC College we are revisiting you good morning. We are actually madam yesterday we were busy with the international conference at our center. So, yesterday only you had here you say and we will go. Okay thank you please read the paper and you will be able to follow the presentation soon after. So, we will come back to you later thank you over and out. M.E.S. Pillay good morning have you formed a response to the paper over to you. Good morning madam I am Prem Goyal from Pillay College and the workshop coordinator but I have not seen the paper because we have not got the ID and password. So, please send us the ID password so we can see the paper. Okay if you have sent us an email already then we are working on it you should receive it very shortly and we will get back to you. Thank you over and out. SDS ITS Indore good morning do you have a response to the paper. Ma'am I would not reject the paper because it has lot of content but I also had observed that there is a lot of problem related to flow. So, I would suggest the author to make some thorough revision in the paper because there is a figure which tells about how learning happens but it has not been utilized in the paper. There is there are no comments on this figure in the paper. First of all the author should tell how learn what are the problems current which actually have been given in the introduction but later on he should first write about what how learning happens what are the conventional methods of teaching what are the lacunas and then what improvements would help the students to become more industry useful. So, that should be the flow in which the paper should be written. Okay thank you very much. The observations related to formatting have already been made by many of the participants. Thank you and your comment about talking about conventional methods that already exist and the gaps within it is really important and we will address this a great deal in the presentation. So, thank you very much over and out. Kakinada, good morning. Do you have a response to the paper over to you? Very good morning ma'am. Actually I am the research scholar and I have published only two papers. With my observation I have noticed two things. It is not that much necessary to change the tables and the diagrams and all. It should require small alignment. The data is sufficient and now we are talking about some college engineering colleges. So, that data should be there what the engineering colleges based on the data we have taken on which data we have made this conclusion that should be appendix ma'am. This is a small suggestion I would like to make to you ma'am. Okay thank you for your comment Kakinada over and out. SVU Tirupati, good morning. Do you have a response to the paper over to you? I am a Makshop coordinator at SVU College of Engineering Tirupati. So far I have not received the Moodle ID. As soon as I receive that Moodle ID I will mail my comments to them. Okay we will work on it right now. Thank you for your comments. We will get back to you. Thanks. Jalga, good morning. Do you have a response to the paper over to you? Very good morning ma'am. I am from KC Engineering College, Jalga. I have gone through the paper. The answer for the assignment for question one is B but I mean I have gone through the paper that there is some reference is not as much solution for the paper. So it is necessary to give the more references and secondly that the data structure which is being used for this paper are used for a different discipline over to you ma'am. Okay thank you for your comments over and out. R.C. Patel, Sherpur, good morning. Do you have a response to the paper over? Madam answer to the first question is I will accept this paper but with some little bit modification and the answer to the second question is that in the introduction there is no need to divide the introduction in the two parts likewise the problem statement and CIT program. We can just means no need to define the problem statement in case of introduction and the flow of the paper is very good. Okay thank you R.C. Patel over and out. Anayu University, good morning. Do you have a response to the paper over to you? Based upon your assignment I chose the question number two in option number two accepting the paper with the slight modifications, a modification they posted in the model and as a reviewer usually whenever any paper is submitted to me first I'll take the plagiarism but what about the content is there or first I'll take it in the internet whether the paper has already been published this way. Then we'll start the review. Once I start the review usually I'll go through the flow. First thing is introduction and the chapeur organization and the literature survey and the problem and definition and come to the model and the experimentation and the answer. This is made for usually adapted for any review come to me and the same thing if I approach here the presentation and how since we cannot check it in the workshop I mean as in one type. Assume that it's a first-time paper. The methodology has to be focused a little bit by highlighting or projecting put it in table or like that and then some more existing works is a mystery here again though the format here and there the diagrams has to be read and it's read. The analysis part some more than only the paper can be justified that's all about to me over to you ma'am. So thank you everybody for your responses and as you might have noticed the goal of giving you an assignment to do slightly before the meeting was to get all of you in the frame of mind to actually now discuss what are features of a good paper and this is exactly what we will be doing on the main workshop also. We will have some presentations but we will also have a lot of hands-on activity and you will be the people who will be leading the activities in your respective remote centers. So one goal of doing this assignment in this manner was that when you conduct the activity we will post guidelines but you will also you also now have an idea of what you need to be focusing on from the participants that arrive at your remote center. So what we will do for the next say 15 minutes or so is to summarize what we have heard from all our colleagues in the past half an hour and after that we will go over to the day to day schedule of the actual workshop. So I am going to now go through some of the slides that should already have been uploaded and as we are going to the slide what you will notice is that a number of points that you have made that I have also noted down have appeared in the slide. So most of you are thinking along the right direction but many of you have missed a few points. So let what I would like you to pay attention to is which points you have already spoken about which points your colleagues have talked about and which points you have missed which will give an entire picture of what is a good conference spoke of. So I am on slide 2 of aspects of a well written paper. Most of today I would like to concentrate on the logical flow part which is you have to first set up the problem you have to sell your problem and I know that some of you did mention it I will have to look at my notes to say to see who has mentioned it but a few of you said that you have to write a problem which is interesting which is relevant which is important only then will a referee even bother to look at your solution. So a catchy way of talking about setting your problem is that in a well written paper the problem has to be well sold before the solution is even bought. So we will spend time on how to sell your problem well. Once you sell your problem well whether it be using motivation or relevance or importance then you can start explaining your solution. So here again a lot of you mentioned that the flow of the methodology has to be clear more details are required in the methodology all you are doing at this stage is explaining what you did and the third part which is again very important is why did you do what you did which in the sense you have to provide evidence for your solution you have to defend your solution. Some of you said that the paper had a few well supported had well supported data to to defend their solution and a few of you mentioned that more data are needed to provide evidence for their solution all those come under defend your solution. The third point about good writing style almost all of you have mentioned we will have one session in the workshop on this but I am not going to spend too much time today because this is the first thing all of you seem to have focused on. What we seem to have missed a little bit is this first part. So we will spend more time on the first part and all of you know about good grammar good formatting good writing style section and so on. On the main workshop we will have one session on this finally I come to the top bullet point here and one of you did mention this actually know many of you mentioned that the title of the paper wasn't very clear the title of the paper has to be a summarization of the main contribution of the paper within the paper there needs to be the clear contribution of the paper needs to be very clearly mentioned. So even though I have put this at the top sometimes it is not possible to think about this till the end whether you think it at the beginning or at the end the contribution what extra thing you are doing has to be there in the paper. So let us just go through the logical flow first and then we will come to the contribution. In the logical flow the plan and organization of the paper there as we saw earlier the three parts set up your problem explain and then defend your solution what you can do when you are working with your students or when you are referring is to see if these three sections are there and if they are there in place that means the paper has a good flow. Why you need to set up your problem is that even if you have good ideas good ideas are not sufficient to make a good paper. Sometimes people would also have done some good work based on the idea but just the idea and the work again is not sufficient to make a good research article. So what you have to do at this point is think about the context the larger context the usefulness and also the rigor of the study itself and as a couple of you mentioned you have to think about other work to compare with. So how do you set up the problem? We have split this up into six steps and these slides are what we will be expanding into a one hour session on the main workshop. So I would like to give you a preview of what we will be doing there. On the main workshop day we will also give examples for each of these slides. So what I request you is to think of a few examples to support these and you can post your examples over moodle but let us just run through the main steps right now. When you are setting up your problem you have to first think about and write about the main concept underlying your work. It is not sufficient to give definitions even though you should do it. It is a good idea to illustrate your concept with an example. So right here start with what you are doing with an example. If there are multiple definitions give all of them and say clearly which definition you are picking. For example one of the people pointed out that there was something on learning by doing here. There may be many ways of thinking about learning by doing. So which of the different ways is this author choosing has to be made clear in at right at this stage. You have to establish the importance of your work and I would split this up into two parts. One is what why is the fundamental concept the main idea behind your work why is that important and secondly why is your specific work important. What we mean here is the fundamental concept behind your work relates to the broad related work the broad context in which you are situating your work that has to be mentioned in the paper and then what has to be mentioned is why your specific work is important forms a small piece of this broad related work. For example here are some examples how you can write about broad related work and I do remember that one of our colleagues today did mention this. What are traditional ways to solve this problem write a couple of sentences on that. Is there a theoretical basis if you are doing an experiment. What techniques have been already tried and not been successful or have been successful. So you have to talk about both traditional ways as well as novel ways to that has already been tried to solve this problem. You have to not only describe it you also have to analyze the broad related work and you can use figures or tables or concept maps here to identify themes and categorize the related work. All these steps are important in trying to build a case for why your problem is important you have not yet come to the solution you are simply trying to sell your problem at this stage. Once you know the themes of the broad related work once you know the themes of the related work what you need to do is identify the gaps or the lacunae in the current solution that are already there in the related work. These gaps form the need for your work how you will position your work. So what I will do for a moment here is let me just take a short break and look at the chat because I see that there are few comments here. If you have any doubts about what we have done so far what I will suggest is write a chat comment. We will come and talk to you in a few minutes but if there is some minor clarification you need or as one of you mentioned I was going too fast or if you need an example somewhere just put it in the chat question and we look at it right away. Just to summarize what we have done so far we looked at how to sell the problem and within selling the problem you have to first talk about what is important about the work. You have to talk about broad related work and find the gaps in the broad related work. After you do that you look at specific work or work that is very similar to your work if it has already been done. If you are implementing a new technique you should say that nobody else has done so far. If somebody else has tried your technique you should also mention that and say why they did or did not succeed. As a referee this is an important point. Sometimes we see papers where we see a very good idea but it is not clear if it is the person's original idea or if they are basing it on somebody else's work. Either is ok but you have to explicitly mention whether you are basing it on someone's work or whether it is completely new. Finally you use all these motivations and broad related work to write explicitly the research problem that you are solving in the paper. You might have a very good idea but unless you explicitly say it the referees will be lost and they might not read the rest of your paper because they don't know what question you are solving. So here there are a couple of suggestions and tips. Try to phrase your question as a broad interesting problem first level question and then a number of second level questions which are very specific which you will answer in your paper. Try to phrase these questions as questions and not as sentences. So you can ask you can pose a problem such as what is the effectiveness of the technique that I am trying or how does the new software that have created work in a different context. What I would suggest that you should not do is write a problem statement which starts with the purpose of the study is to validate the result. So please avoid phrasing the questions as sentences phrase them as questions instead. Let me take a couple of chat questions that have come up. There is one very important and interesting question. The question is usually there is a limit on the number of pages in a conference paper. How can we explain all that you have mentioned? This is an important point and the first answer I will give you is that you have to address all the points that I have mentioned so far. You cannot omit any of the points mentioned so far just to save space because if you drop any of the points mentioned so far the flow of the paper will be lost and essentially you haven't solved your problem well enough. So you cannot drop any of the points. On the other hand if you are really crunched for space what you should do is perhaps write one or two sentences for each of the six points that I mentioned so far. Let me just go back and look at the points. Let's start from what is the main concept underlying your work. Try to write this as one or two sentences again two or three sentences on why is your work important. Maybe one paragraph on related work the same paragraph can contain three past instances of related work and two sentences of your summary or of your analysis of related work. One sentence on the gap and one sentence on how your solution can address the gap three or four sentences on what is your problem. If you do all this your entire the entire all the points that have been mentioned so far will not take more than I would say one column width and it is a very that column width of sentences that you will write are very useful and important because by now the referee is so interested in reading your paper that they will go and read the rest of it. So instead of removing any of the points I have mentioned I would say write it briefly but do address them. The second question on the chat forum is is it advisable to have a catchy title. What I would suggest here is instead of trying to find a catchy title just for the sake of being catchy try to make sure that the title summarizes the main contribution of the paper. In the current paper you read this morning all of you said that the title was not appropriate because it did not capture the main thing that the authors were doing and you are all right. So what you can think is what should be the appropriate title for the paper that you already read. I will post an assignment a follow up assignment which you can submit in one week and one of the questions I will put there is what would have been a better title. So a catchy title is good but do not make it catchy just for the sake of making it catchy and make sure that the main contribution of the paper is summarized in the in your title itself. Let me also take a couple of questions at this point. Let us look at a question from VIT Valor over to you Valor. Yes madam regarding that paper there are too many abbreviations in the paper which confuses the reader to have a flow of the paper and few of them is not been mentioned properly for example ICT that does not mean what is there what is the meaning for the ICT is not been given anywhere in the paper. Okay thank you let me respond to this a little bit again here the domain expertise or the domain or okay my response to this question is choose very carefully which conference you are sending it to and write in the same style as other papers within that conference and what this means is there are certain conferences or there are certain communities of people for whom you need not expand what is ICT it is because it is a word they use 50 times a day and it is like saying 10 a.m. you do not have a a m is an abbreviation but all of us know what is a m it is some Latin word some of us do not know but we know the meaning of a m and we do not need to be told each time what is a m on the other hand there are certain other abbreviations which is not where are not which are not very familiar to community of people. So based on which conference you are sending it to check your paper and see if you have made any abbreviations which are uncommon it so happened that the paper that the conference to to which this paper was sent by the way this was an accepted paper in a conference after modifications and all I might have posted the previous draft the paper the conference name was ICT in education. So if the name of the conference is ICT in education there was no need for these people to explain again what is ICT but your point is well taken that for a new group new domain this abbreviations have to be expanded and what we can learn from the question posed by Valor is that you have to match what you are writing to to the conference that you are sending it to. Thank you Valor over and out Sastra University over to regarding the databases we can we can also refer database called scopus scopus database then for checking this plagiarism and other things whether it is already existing you can go for wipe the wiper is a free software really downloadable software then regarding with respect to this paper you talked about some expansions and other things abbreviations since in the abstract itself the abbreviations are given it is not a project report so we need not provide any abbreviations in the beginning then there is no specific format for the references sometimes the author name is listed in the beginning then the title then in case some cases title then author there is no specific format followed here then regarding this numbering in each chapter whether is there any unique numbering scheme followed or you can number as we like you see they have taken as ABC some some usually we will prefer if it is a chapter 1 means we will prefer 1.1 1.2 like that okay thank you for your questions I will go backwards because that is the freshest in my mind numbering scheme and section and subsection numbers in a paper is defined by the conference template almost all conferences give you or publish a template that you have to follow different conferences might follow different templates sometimes conferences simply say follow the common IEEE template if a conference publishes a template please make sure you follow their template and their numbering scheme even if you do not like it because all the papers within that conference will follow the same unique numbering scheme if a conference does not publish a numbering scheme I would suggest that you go for some very standard numbering scheme if you are in the engineering domain take one published by IEEE and follow that screen your question before that had to do with how to write the references and again that is part of the conference template the template will tell you whether the author name should come first whether the title of the paper should come first whether there should be numbered or in alphabetical order that will also be given within the template itself. So, for both these things follow the conference template that is a good point you may regarding the earlier point of plagiarism we do have a whole session in the main workshop on plagiarism and one part of the workshop is about tell sharing with you the various software that are available to automatically detect plagiarism. So, that is big part of the main workshop and thanks for bringing it up and the moment we look at the schedule you will see that it is the first session on day 2 plagiarism is a very important point. So, we just decided to have a whole session based on it. So, thank you again for your comments over and out we have a couple of more questions PSG college Coimbatore. Yes madam we are able to hear you and we are yes madam we are able to get the assignment. The assignment is not there in the main. So, I checked already I set a mail also to send the assignment so that we are able to talk to you and really now we are able to talk to you earlier we had some the frequency problem. Thank you. Everybody now should we sent an email to everybody giving you Moodle access login and passwords. So, everybody should have access to Moodle the assignment and the paper have been posted on Moodle. The assignment has not been separately sent via email what has been sent via email to you is the Moodle access and Moodle password. So, please check your email use the password given to you login to Moodle and that should help you access the assignment. Thank you. Is GSITS Indore over to you? Hello. Yes ma'am you had told about the possible good sentences to be put in the conclusion a part of the paper. You had asked whether the first sentence would be better or the second one. Hello. Yes please go on. Can you listen to me ma'am? Yeah actually I think as you said that the first sentence would be better than the second one but I think in the first sentence also it has not been told about which aspect are we the which aspect has been focused in our contribution. So, that should be included in the first sentence as well in my opinion and my second question maybe you can answer it later on if you feel it right. The question is what is the fundamental difference between a conference paper and a journal paper though we discuss about the contributions made in both of them. Thank you for your comment and I think I would like to address your second question right now because I was planning to address it at some point. The question is what is the difference between a journal paper and a conference paper and I will also pose another question why are we focusing only on one of it in this workshop why don't we look at other kinds of research articles and so on. I might have briefly mentioned earlier and I do remember that Professor Fartuck had also mentioned it that there are a number of aspects common to all kinds of technical writing. A number of points that we discussed earlier today morning that you brought up and that was there in my presentation are common to journal papers and conference papers. For example, selling the problem is important, explaining the solution is important and defending the solution is also important for both journal papers and conference papers. So, how do you decide if you should send your paper to a journal or to a conference? One of the main differences is that the way a conference works there are a number of people who have to who get together at a certain time and before that a number of people submit papers. The turn around time for papers that is the time for review is usually very short in conference papers. It is of the order of a month maybe three weeks maybe six weeks. So, the referees have a very short amount of time to review the papers that is one thing that is different than a conference paper excuse me than a journal paper where referees usually have a little longer to review the paper. Secondly, the because this turn around time is short and there are a number of papers what you might think of focusing on for a conference paper is novelty. I am not saying that you should not focus on rigor I am not saying that you should sacrifice flow and content, but if your paper has a good idea a small good idea you might want to first pilot it in a conference with some pilot data and then gather a lot more stronger evidence lot richer data lot more rigorous analysis and publish it within a conference and publish it within a journal after you are done with the pilot data. Conference papers usually do not have time to be revised and resubmitted only minor revisions are possible in journal papers the referee might ask you to revise it even three or four times that is not uncommon. So, given all this to do to focus both on conference papers and journal papers in a two day workshop was coming out to be a little difficult. So, what we said is let us start with the conference paper which usually has a very small page limit one of you mentioned it earlier also that a big difference between conference papers and journal papers is the page limit journal papers are typically longer and there is not a very hard and fast restriction conference papers can be as short as two pages sometimes typically there are four or six or eight. So, if you have to talk about a few ideas condensed into six or eight pages you have to make sure that you choose a small aspect and it is interesting and it is well supported. In a journal paper you can afford to put in a lot more data and a lot more analysis and you can talk about a few other things because you have the space and because the referees have the time to give you comments. So, I hope that at least answers this question at a top level and this is also a point that we will be bringing up in one of the sessions of the final workshop because we thought that this is a point worth addressing. So, thank you for your question over and out in the world. Let us take a question from Erod. I would like to comment on the paper presentation madam given to you. Now is there any future work has to be given before your conclusion and there are few conclusions has been given but the title has been given only conclusion. Is it correct madam? Okay. So, let me answer your second question first. Should it be conclusion or should it be conclusions? And I think this is a matter of grammar. If you are saying it is conclusion what you are meaning is this is the conclusion to the entire study or the entire work. So, it is like a collective plural. We use the word people even though people has one word it can have large number of persons within that word people. So, when you say conclusion you are using it as a collective plural for the entire study. If you say conclusions it is like saying I am drawing two or three conclusions from this particular results. So, in my opinion either is okay I will check with my colleagues from the English department which one is better but it is a very minor point and I think either is okay based on the context. Secondly you asked whether future work should come before the conclusion or after the conclusion and there is no hard and fast rule here. It really depends on how the paper flows. It might depend on the norms followed in your domain or within a particular conference. So, again check the conference template to see if they suggest some norm. If there is no norm suggested then I would say you pick the one which flows better. I hope that answers your questions. Let us take a question from Baramati. Over to you Baramati. Good morning ma'am. Over to you Baramati. Hello. Good morning ma'am. Just I want to ask related to in what way we should write the review paper. So, I think I am going to postpone this question postpone answering this question right now. I will make a note of this because review papers are a little outside the scope of the flow or the outline that I gave earlier. The purpose of a review paper is not to report your original research result. On the other hand the purpose of a review paper is to do a very comprehensive survey of all existing work in a given topic or in a specified sub topic. Since the goal of the review paper is very different I would I think it the aspects we discussed earlier may not exactly apply. Secondly review papers usually are not part of conferences. Most conferences rely on original research results even though they may have a few papers or a few tracks. So, I would at this point I would say that review papers are outside our scope, but it is a good idea to know the goal of the review paper and how it is different from an original research article as I just mentioned. I will take a question from a chat from Kanjipuram. It says if we want to extend a published conference paper to a journal paper how much percentage novelty do we need to have. When you ask very specific questions like that there is no specific answer I cannot say you have to have 50 percent more or 30 percent more there is no answer like that, but all I can do is suggest broad guidelines. If you want to extend a conference paper to the journal to a journal paper you have to have something new. For example, you may have done the study in one location for a conference paper and reported the results and conclusion for the conference paper. For the journal paper you could repeat the study in two or three more contexts maybe with two or three different materials or with a different parameter and do a comparative study of how the results compare when you change the parameter. You have to have a stronger analysis or let us say larger amount, larger number of data points, larger analysis for the journal paper. It is not sufficient to do to extend your data set by one or two and then publish it as a conference paper. And what I would highly discourage all of you from doing is to publish what are called incremental papers or delta x papers. And I was having this discussion with my colleague yesterday who will be teaching one of the sessions in the main workshop of Professor Gaetan Dei. He said he has seen a lot of papers where the extension maybe is in one data point and a new data and a new paper is published. Sometimes such papers are treated as plagiarized even though you yourself might have written the paper. So please avoid making a small or delta x improvement and publishing it as a completely new paper. It is not ethical to do it. It is not good practice in research.