 Let us if you want to ask some more questions, we have about 20 minutes. So, we can do another interactive session at this point. So, I already see two hands raised and we can jump into it right away. Jabalpur College, Jabalpur over to you Jabalpur College. Ma'am, yesterday you had given one homework. I had written two sentences that too unchecked. Number one, the methodology that I adopted is quoting real-life examples at times establishing synchronized analogies so as to convey concept effectively, develop interest in learning, break the monotony and keep teaching alive. Second one, expect responses from the students at times to complete the sentence which I have intentionally left incomplete so as to pull the attention of these students and create competition amongst these students. Okay, thank you Jabalpur College. Let me just summarize what that person had done and I would like to give a few comments there. So, there were two ideas, teaching learning ideas that the faculty member has implemented in class. For example, he has intentionally left certain sentences incomplete so as to draw the attention of students and create a healthy competition amongst students. These are the kind of ideas that we are looking for. Another idea that he stated was quoting a real-life example to establish an analogy. When you start with your ideas, this is exactly what I mean. Think of any small idea that you already have used and try to develop it into a research problem. So, thank you again for your ideas. What I would, what I need to say at this point unfortunately is that I say unfortunate because I would not be able to give you feedback on each of your ideas right now or I am sure all of you have really good ideas that is why the homework too is going to be uploaded. And that is where it may be possible for me and other people to give you feedback. Please try to limit your comments and questions right now to actual questions and if you are not sure if you should ask the question or not here is a guideline. Do you think all the other 2,499 fellow participants would benefit from your question? If so, please go ahead and ask it. Secondly, just a quick reminder of the protocol. If I say over to you it is your turn to speak, there is no need to ask if the audio video is not, if the audio is not clear, if the video is not clear. If it is not clear, we will tell you right away. And when you are done speaking, please say the same thing over to you. Next question from Truba College Indore. Over to you Indore. Mathematical penetration is required in writing a conference or general papers. Okay, thank you for your question Truba College. What was asked is, if a mathematical manipulation was done, let us say you had to do a long derivation of some proof, is that required for a conference paper? You have to decide that because let me flash a slide. What evidence will you provide to justify your claims? The evidence can be an analysis of proof. If you think that the mathematical derivation is required to provide the evidence, you should give it. If you think that it is unnecessary and digressing from the main points, do not give it. So, nobody other than you, even other people in your own domain will not be able to answer this question. Evidence on evidence will help you decide whether you have to include it or not. Let us look at a question from Amrita School in Bangalore. Over to you Amrita. I have two questions. Question one is, suppose there is a published work attacking a particular work in a particular way. Is it possible to publish another paper attacking the same problem in a different way with no particular advantages as of now? But that may have advantages in future which others can find out. Thank you for your question, Amrita. The question was, is it, this question was asked in a slightly different way at the beginning at around 10 o'clock. That if you have already published something, should you, can you publish it again? In the morning I talked about what to do if you have extra data. Here the question is what to do if you have a different way of doing it, but you do not know whether that new method is more advantageous or so on. Again when the question is very specific it is hard to answer without details, but let us look at some guidelines. I think these slides do provide all the guidelines. What are the key contributions? And by here in this slide by your, let us replace it by what are the key contributions of this paper. If you are able to say that this paper you are writing makes key contributions that have not been made before, you can go ahead rewrite your second paper based on the first one. On the other hand if you are not able to say what are the main contributions of your second paper, it might be worthwhile to wait, do more experiments or identify in what way the new technique is more advantageous and then write your second paper. So use this slide as a check for yourself. One more small comment regarding protocol. If you have more than one question I would encourage you to ask only one at a time because as you saw yesterday I will tend to forget either the first one or the last one and I might not answer all your questions. So ask one question also we have a large number of people in the queue and I would like to visit everybody at least once. Anna University Chennai over to you. How many problems can be referred to the specific problem domain whether journals or magazines or conference papers would provide better solution for the reference for the problem domain. Over to you. Thanks Anna University. I think the question was about how many references to include. I am not sure if anybody in the audience heard it. I am going to assume that the question you asked is how many references to provide. We did discuss this point a lot yesterday there is no fixed number here and since we talked about it at great length yesterday I will only say that use let me summarize what we talked about yesterday. Use as many references as are required to make your central point. If there are survey papers those are good references because they in turn contain references to further to all the other papers. If your references are newer usually the practices you refer to the newer ones or the most important ones or the most comprehensive ones. So the most comprehensive papers are the survey papers the new papers are easy to find out and how do you determine if the reference is important or not. There are certain see if it appears over and over again see how seminal the work is and so on SRM Kanchipuram over to you. My question is like suppose in any research work we are going to implement something and for that we are using some algorithm that has been previously described but in my work I am going to change that algorithm based on the I mean basic building block but after that the flow will be as per the existing one. So is it necessary I should include that algorithm in the paper over to you. The question is if there has been some previous work done specifically in this case previous algorithm something has been changed is it necessary to include the previous work. I am going to answer this very broadly the key word here is relevant but is it relevant or not is a call you have to take and you have to take that call also based on the ideas we discussed this morning on giving credit to others. How much is your algorithm dependent on the previous one? If you do not give credit to the previous one it is not right but let us say you are asking should I actually include that algorithm and how many details very broad answer again as many details as it would need for the reader to understand your work. So when you ask a very specific question I am only going to be able to answer it at this broad level these are very these are good questions because that is where we all get stuck I might in turn reply to your question with further questions. So what I would ask you in this case is how relevant is the previous algorithm and I think it is because you are basing your work on theirs then put yourself in the shoes of the reader and ask is it necessary for the reader to know the details of the previous algorithm in order to understand my understand mine. If the answer is yes do include it. If the answer is partially perhaps you can summarize. If the answer is no my work is stand alone even though it is based on something then you perhaps do not need to include all the details but you still have to cite it. I hope that answers your question. Let us look at a question from SGS-ITS Indore over to you Indore. Good afternoon madam first of all we would like to congratulate you for an enlightening session on technical writing. My question is do we need to provide mathematical model to validate a method for which experimental results have already been given. Thanks for your kind words and it is an interesting question that how much evidence to provide that is how I would try to abstract out your question. If you have experimental evidence and strong data do you also need to give a proof and a theoretical analysis of it. Let us go back to the slide. You have to give as much evidence as the reader would need to believe you. How much is good enough is again dependent on the situation itself. A good practice usually is that what is done overall when scientific knowledge gets created and discussed. If you are able to give evidence from multiple sources it is considered the claim is considered to be stronger. Just like if you measure something using two different methods you can be more sure of the measurement. So if you are able to give a theoretical proof as well as experimental evidence it is a very strong paper. It is a very strong and you have defended your claims very strongly. If on the other hand everybody knows that there exists a theoretical proof to the claim but nobody has shown the experiment yet and you are filling in that gap. It might be sufficient to say that a proof exists, here is the reference, nobody has done the experiment so far, here are our data. So whether you have to provide everything or only part of it depends one on the problem you are trying to solve, two on what has been done before and three on how strong you want to substantiate your claims. Let us look at a question from MES Pillay Nupanveli over to your MES. Thank you so much ma'am. Ma'am I have two questions. My question number one is are the keywords necessary to write after the abstract what should be the criteria for writing the keywords? My second question is is it necessary to summarize all the sections of a paper in the introduction briefly? Thank you ma'am. The first question is easy, should I should you write keywords or not? It depends on the format that the conference asks you to do. Most engineering journals they ask for it and in some cases they do not. So just look at what style and what whether it is required. So you make the call depending on what the journal publishers or the conference program chairs ask you for. The second thing had to do with the introduction and I believe the reason this question was asked was because of a slide that I showed you, the slide said the introduction should be brief and complete. The word complete here means that the introduction should be sufficient for a reader to understand what you are going to do, why you are going to do it and how you have done it and what you found. Many readers may not go beyond it, that is what complete means. Complete does not mean all the details, complete means at the outline stage. If you are able to sketch out quickly the problem outline of the solution claims and why they exist. Good readers would go on and people who are not interested in the details might say, oh this is a very, this looks like good work but it is beyond what I want to work on so I look at something else. Yet you have given them a full idea of what you have done and that was the meaning of the word complete here and in a way you did bring out an interesting contradiction between the word brief and complete. How is it possible to be brief and yet complete at the same time and the way you try to resolve this contradiction is by looking at the outline, not at the details. Question from K. J. Somaya, Mumbai over to you K. J. Somaya. In yesterday's session we had discussed about one technical paper, it was in the style of report writing in active voice. This morning session in writing style, again it was suggested to write it in the same style but in standard IEEE format about technical papers we find some different style of writing so which one we should adopt. Over to you. This was, it is a good observation you have made that most or many I would say not most. Many technical and scientific papers even in top journals are written in a style which contains passive voice which reads and I am going to use this word without any judgment which is very dry because we have been taught that that is the way to write. If you do it that way you are not going to violate any rule. If you write in passive voice you are going to violate the rule in trunk and white which is the Bible for one of the other Bibles for grammar and writing but in terms of scientific writing everybody does it you can do it. What was mentioned yesterday and today was if you want to write powerfully, if you want to write precisely in an attractive manner so that the reader wants to go on so that the referee understands what you are doing active voice conveys all this much better. Secondly, in terms of your own thinking active voice gives you a more clear way of putting down your thoughts. So, look at fourth entry here it might be noted that this method only works in the static situation that is the passive way of writing it. The active way of writing it is we and here we refers to the authors. We would like to emphasize that this method only works in the static situation. I think this example is good to illustrate that the active voice is powerful it draws the reader's attention you are using the word emphasize and you are using the word we emphasize. So the right the reader is going to is primed to look at the rest of the sentence. Secondly when you are writing it the moment you say we would like to emphasize the writer you know that you have to write something important because you say we want to emphasize. So in your own mind you are trying to think of what is the most important thing you want to say after the phrase we would like to emphasize. So active voice is preferred for all these reasons I do agree with your observations that most or many scientific papers are in passive voice. I know I did not answer your question do this well if you ask me which one you should do I would say use the active voice it is much more powerful. If you then ask me well are other people doing anything wrong by using the passive voice I am going to refrain from answering it is I do not think it is wrong but it might be less powerful. We have a question from we have a comment from Dr. Mukta Atres. I am just adding to her question right now there was a query on Moodle if one should use V or I at all. The queries should be use I or V at all I would say in some cases the style or the format either encourages or discourages you if you know that in your field in your domain it is completely prohibited to use the word I did this then please do not do it. In some cultures by culture I mean in some scientific communities it might not be good etiquette to say I did this. If you belong to that community perhaps it is not a good idea for you to follow it. On the other hand the reason active voice is suggested is to directly and clearly state what you want to state that is why most style guides and most people who teach good technical writing suggest that. Question from R.C. Patel Sherpur over to you. Hello my question is if my work is already published in some conference can I resubmit it to some journal with some modification if not whether it will come under self plagiarism. My second question is a survey paper written by person who is not well known in that field shall he submit paper for journal or conference what is your comment go to a map. Thank you R.C. Patel I am going to take only the second question because we have discussed the first question twice already once in the morning and once even in this session. So I am going to ask you to discuss with your colleagues in your remote center and see and maybe they can summarize the discussion for you. The second question is about a survey paper should a person let us say a novice researcher or a beginning student should they write it. Let me tell you the advantages of attempting to write a survey paper the student who tries to write a survey paper is going to gain a lot because they have to as a word suggests survey a large number of published articles they have to in fact they will become an expert in their field if they manage to do a good job in writing a survey paper. Should you send it for publication some conferences do not even allow survey papers when should you send it for publication do so only if you are sure that you have done a very comprehensive job poorly written survey paper is useless for anybody for and even for the person who is writing it a survey paper that actually manages to do a comprehensive survey including an analysis survey papers not simply a listing of what else other people have done there is a serious analysis done comparison of various techniques various results between one paper and the other. So, if you are a novice researcher and decide think of if you are thinking of writing it follow all these guidelines I know we did not talk too much about survey papers here and that was in the aim of this workshop I am sure you will find certain guidelines on what constitutes a good survey paper. The analysis part is something I had forgotten to mention earlier, but that is important when we were discussing the literature survey section of yesterday's papers the good paper and the not so good paper we made some points there why the good paper had a better written survey section it is the same points even in a survey paper do not simply list all the 100 papers you read categorize them draw themes find out why how they compare against each other and so on. Walchand college sangly over to you. Actually I would like to ask two questions first one is that is it necessary that we should do practical work at the time of writing the conference paper means before practical test cases must be there or no at the time of writing the conference papers. The second question is while we present the conference paper in the conference we have been given only 10 minutes to present it. So what should we concentrate in this 10 minutes at the time of presentation? Tell to you madam. Okay thanks second question first that is easier concentrate on your key contributions I know keep coming back to that, but if you have been given 10 minutes or sometimes you will be given 6 minutes let us look at the case of the distance education scenario interactivity in distance education that we have been talking. Suppose you spend 3 out of those 6 minutes on why distance education is beneficial and how so many people are using it you have wasted a valuable 3 minutes everybody in that session in the conference will know about distance education it is likely that the entire conference is about distance education you do not have to talk about why the problem of distance education is important. But what you can start with there is main concept underlying your work interactivity and distance education so you can start from there quickly very quickly come to your contributions that is what everybody is looking for then spend some time justifying those. If you make great claims and do not provide evidence it is no good if you do not make the claims at all it is even worse. So that is the second question should practical data be included in conference papers? I think this previous session has helped me because I have slides to answer all your questions at least I feel that they do answer. Defend your solution if you have proposed an idea and not provided any test cases no implementation data it is still just an idea. It becomes the answer to a research question only if you provide evidence for that idea. So you we do see this situation quite often people send in papers with good ideas but with no test cases no implementation no data sometimes not even plans for doing so. We do have to reject those papers from the conference because until you have some sort of evidence it is just an idea. What kind of evidence that is again up to you and we have discussed it but only an idea it is not even a claim at that point it is not even a contribution it might be a very good idea but it is not a contribution unless you have an evidence for it. NITU Arangil over to you. Good afternoon professor and madam really we are happy to associate with this kind of session you have given lot of work to the enthusiastic participants. Hello ma'am what is citation is there any difference between citation and in-text references are there compulsory in the conference papers. Okay thanks the first question what is citation I would suggest that you look at the slides from session 6 will be posted very soon on what is a citation very briefly it is a way you give credit from in your paper it is a way you tell your reader that you are referring to somebody else's work. In papers usually you only have citations you only do site you only have to site. Index references and all I am not exactly sure what you are referring to but those do not come within a paper it is only when you are trying to see how many times somebody else has referred to somebody else's work those become important. So I am not it is something I do not think we should be bothered about at this point. Let us look at a question from MES IMCC Pune over to you MES. Good afternoon ma'am my question is what is camera copy and how we can prepare this camera copy for general paper or constant paper over to you ma'am. The question is what is a camera ready paper this happens if you have been asked to submit a camera ready paper it means it is good news for you. Because your paper your draft has already been accepted by the conference chairs or by the journal editors. Camera ready copy is the final copy that is going to go into the journal or the conference the conference proceedings no change is made on the camera ready copy or once a camera ready copy is done it is ready no change is made. So what usually happens in a process is that you submit your draft it goes through a review process depending on whether it is a journal or conference the review process is the different ways the review process happens. Papers some papers are directly accepted some authors are told to revise and resubmit some are told to revise and into the camera ready and so on. As an author your responsibility is to read the reviewers comments take them seriously evaluate them and act on their comments it does not mean that you have to do every single thing that they told you to do you can choose to refute it in a journal you cannot do that in a conference. So you and by refute I mean if you have strong reasons to think that the reviewer said something that you have already done you can simply point out saying that look this has already been done. But most of the times it is a good idea to take all review comments very seriously you revise your paper that is your final camera ready paper and you submit it after that no change is done. This has to do with the process in which conference and journal papers operate. Last question for now M.A. and I.T. Bhopal over to you please. The question is if there are there already has been if you already see a table comparing the techniques of solving a problem. This is often common in survey papers can you use the table as is I would like to reference the points we made today morning about using an illustration or a sentence directly from another paper this falls in the same category. If you are going to use a table as is from somewhere else it is equivalent to using a paragraph or picking up a paragraph and directly quoting it in your paper it is usually not a good idea to do it because it is for a paragraph you can put quotation marks you can indent the text you can use different font to tell the reader that look this is somebody else's words these are somebody else's words it is you cannot do that in a table what you should be doing at that point is if you also want to talk about a comparative analysis develop your own comparison it can be based on the previous persons table but try to find a few new things to compare with compare the papers against maybe you can say that we extend the table that was present in the survey paper add five more techniques and here is the extension that we present. Your extension in can be in terms of number of rows number of rows are usually the number of entries you are comparing or it can be in terms of the number of columns which are the criteria that you compare against it is always a good idea to have some extension to a table before you present it otherwise it is exactly like copying somebody else's illustration. With that we are going to have to end this session and the correct slide to have here again is this one and what I want you to concentrate is this last line here I am really very grateful for your sincere and enthusiastic participation it is very encouraging to see all this we can still interact for some more time over moodle over the next one week and I think I would encourage you to do that post your questions.