EE7205-Tech-Pres - Nanyang Technological University

EE7205-Tech-Pres - Nanyang Technological University

Technical Presentation

EE7205: Research Methods

Dr. P. N. Suganthan

Room No No.: : S2 S2-B2a-21 B2a 21

Tel : 67905404

E-mail: E mail: epnsugan@ntu edu sg

(Edited from Prof Martin Adam’s slides)

What to Expect at End of Course

• Explain reasons for carrying out research.

• Produce a simple project proposal.

• Undertake a literature search.

• Plan experiments p w.r.t. scientific


Present data appropriately pp p y and explain p


• Understand requirements q for ppresenting g

research (papers, talks etc)

• Appreciate pp the requirements q for pprotecting g

and exploiting research.



Objectives j

• Learn basic skills to become a successful


• Improve research methodology


experimental design, professional ethics &

academic integrity, oral & presentation


• Perform literature survey (you choose

topic), analyse papers, summarise + write

survey in form of scientific paper.


Technical Writing and





• Introduction to Papers and Related Issues

• The Structure of a Scientific Paper

• How to get your Paper Accepted – the

Reviewers Point of View

• The Process of Submitting a Paper

• Making a presentation

Types of Scientific Papers

• Journal papers

– Letter, 3 to 4 pages

– Full paper, 3 to several tens of pages

• Full papers

– NNormal l papers, which hi h generate t kknowledge l d or new

understandings of known issues

– Review papers

• Conference papers

Technical reports – not reviewed

• Magazines

– For example, IEEE Spectrum, may or may not


• Books – least common way of publishing results



A Useful Book

• If you need a book to refer to to, you can try

– Th Thomas N. N Huckin H ki and d LLeslie li AA. Ol Olsen,

Technical Writing and Professional

Communication for Nonnative Speakers of

English”, 2nd Edition, McGraw-Hill, 1991.

NTU library has about 10 copies.

Conference papers p p

• Conference and workshop papers

– Very common in Electrical Eng. and Comp.

Science areas. areas

– You are expected to present your paper paper, don’t don t

submit if you do not intend to go!

– Printed in proceedings.

– Accessible over internet.



Author’s Author s goals

• To get published – to graduate

• To describe interesting new knowledge in an

understandable way

• Must be unpublished work (except review

papers) p p )

– It may be an extension of your previous work

• You can cite other people’s work, but never,

ever, claim someone else’s work as yours!!!

The editor and reader reader’s s perspective

• Suppose you are an editor

– Is the paper in my journal domain?

– Is there new finding? g

– Will it have a wider audience? – boost my journal

impact factor

– IIs it understandable? d t d bl ? - EEnglish li h

• Suppose you are a reader

– IIs it new and d relevant l t to t me? ?

– Helpful to my research?

– Easy to read?



Some questions to ask yourself

bbefore f writing i i

• Who is going to read this?

•Why y did I do the work in the first place? p

• What is the problem I have solved?

– What is new?

• Is my work new and relevant?

• What are my contributions?

• Are there remaining unsolved questions?

The reader should be …

• Intrigued within the first 5 minutes of


• Excited within 15 minutes.

• Satisfied after 45 minutes.



A survey paper

• Who is going to read this?

• What is the problem?

• Which method did people use?

• What are the most relevant contributions?

• AAre there th remaining i i unsolved l d questions? ti ?


Dealing g with page p g limits

• Letters usually have very limited pages

• JJournal l can accept llong papers with i h extra

charge (overlength page charge)

• Conferences usually have a page or word


• Don’t cheat with small fonts, narrow

margins g etc.

• Try to eliminate redundant materials

• Trim the technical section section, if necessary


Where to submit

• FFor School S h l of f EEE students, t d t

– IEEE series, for example, IEEE Signal Proc, Trans. On Robotics

– Applied Physics, for example, APL, JAP.

• Decide where to submit before you write

– Different journals have different formats.

– YYou may also l need d tto cater t ffor a particular ti l audience. di

• Journal paper usually needs longer time

– MMay take t k one or two t years.

– Follow “Instructions to Authors”.

• Conference paper – Remember important dates

– Submission

– Notification: reject or accept.

– Camera-ready copy copy.

– Actual conference with presentation.


• Articles can be rejected for various reasons.

• For example, example your topic does not have a wide

audience (for Nature, Science journal etc.)

• Some conferences accept only 15% 15%.

• However … you get valuable reviews.

• Think twice before complaining (appeal) (appeal).

• Reviewers are anonymous, don’t try to guess

who they are. are

• Use the criticism constructively – if they

misunderstood you you, others will do as well well.

• Consider sending it elsewhere.



Th The Structure St t of f a Paper P

The Title

• Must be informative, clear and meaningful.

• Should gain attention of the reader


• Don’t use symbols in titles.

• Imagine someone searching for your paper paper.



A skeleton paper

• Title, author(s) and affiliation(s)

• Abstract

• Index term/keywords

• Introduction

– Background information

– Problem definition

– Summary of contributions

– Related works

• New Ideas/Experiments

• Results and discussions

• Conclusions

• Acknowledgements

• References

• Appendix if any

The abstract

• Summarizes problem, reasons for the

work and the results.

• Short and concise, 100 – 250 words.

• Avoid references and acronyms.

• Try to sell the paper to the reader – why

sho should ld he/she read it!!!



Indexing and Keywords

• Use them to classify the paper

• A few categories that I use often:

– Differential Evolution

– Ensemble Methods

– Artificial intelligence

– GA (abbreviations ( should be well known!) )

– Index Terms or Keywords (IEEE)

Background g information

• A short introduction to the area.

• What is the current interest?

• What is the current development/status?

• Cit Cite relevant l t references f and d maybe b bbriefly i fl

explain what has been reported there




• Explains the background/significance of

the paper.

• Th The opening i paragraph h should h ld bbe


best paragraph.

• Ended by y what yyou

have done in this


– In this paper, we shall present ……

Problem definition

• A concise statement of what you are


• Why y it is useful to do/solve?

• Identifying a loophole/over looked issue issue.

• Eg: Current liquid crystal displays have a

slow response - results in blurred video

images images. Fast response liquid crystal

displays would therefore be useful.



Summary of Contributions

• The main findings.

• Be concise/precise! (Eg: EVERY symbol in

every equation should be precisely defined!)

• Do not say “new” or “novel” yourself, which

should s oud be mentioned e to ed by ot others. e s

– Some journals j do not allow such terms at all


• Explain how your experiment is done.

• Show how your equations are derived –

only critical steps should be listed.

• How your sample is characterized.

• You may need to have both of these two

components if you have both theory and




Related work

• Identifying all relevant work (with

references) references), even if it is old or does not

solve exactly the same problem.

• Generally, references should be locatable,

avoid use of “personal communications”.

• Do not “bad-mouth” others’ work.

Results and Discussions

• Show your y experimental p results or simulations

with figures.

• “Figure Figure 1 shows …..” …..

• “It can be seen from figure 1 that ……”

• YYou may want t to t highlight hi hli ht some hidd hidden

results by “It is worth mentioning that …”

• You should compare your results with others.

• This is one of the most important parts.




• A short summary of what has been

reported in this paper (like your abstract).

•But, , do not simply py copy py yyour


• Interpretation of your work: pros & cons cons.

• Limitation of your work work.

• MMaybe b suggestions ti ffor ffuture t work. k


• All sources should be referenced.

• Reference numbers should follow the

sequence in which they are cited cited.

• Different journals have different formats for

references – take note!

• Eg Eg. IEEE: Author Author, Journal Journal, Vol Vol. No No. pages

Month, Year.




• Under which grant the project is carried


• Wh Whoever hhas hhelped l d you iin fi finishing i hi thi this


• If the contribution is significant, g yyou


consider to list the person as a co-author.

Choose to cite

• Your reference database can be built up

by reading papers from time to time.

• Or by searching databases, such as “Web

of fS Science”. i ”



Writing gy your paragraph p g p

• An easy way to start a paragraph is “Figure 1

shows …. ”

• Try to avoid very long sentences, i.e.

separate into many short sentences.

– Long g sentences are difficult to comprehend. p

– Purpose p is to let readers know exactly y what yyou

are doing, not to confuse the them!


• The caption of the table should be on top

of the table.

– For a figure, figure it is below the figure figure.

• Different journals have different formats for

tables tables.

• Eg. For APL, JAP, use Table I, Table II,

rather than Table 11, Table 22.




• They should be numbered according to the

sequence they appeared in the text text.

• They should have figure captions to explain

what is in the figure.

• You must refer to EVERY figure in the text.

• Postscript format is generally preferred, Tiff is

not t good d as it iis ttoo bi big and d hhard d tto kknow


whether you have lost some resolution.

HHow tto get t your paper accepted? t d?


Reviewer’s Checklist

– What is the contribution of the paper?

– Does the author explain the significance of this


– Is the paper clearly written and well organized?

– Does the introduction state the purpose of the


– Are the references relevant and complete?

Supply pp y missing g references.

– If the paper is not technically sound, why not?

– If the paper is too long, how can it be


Submitting your paper

• Nowadays Nowadays, online submission is popular or

even mandatory.

• Check for example:



Reviewer’s Reviewer s Recommendations

• Paper p Contribution

Technical Quality

• Originality g y

• Thoroughness of Results

• Clarity of Presentation

• Adequacy of Citations

• Relevance to the Field

• Confidential Comments to the Editor:

• Comments to the Author:

How to write your y draft




The format

• Nowadays – very strict – Template often


•Eg: g IEEE-Trans: Double column format, ,

using IEEE style file (Latex or Word).

• Sequence: title, author, abstract,

keywords, y , main text, , references, , tables

and figures to be cited/placed within text.

Research Results

• The results of research should be recorded and

maintained for analysis and review, both by

collaborators and other scientists. Exceptions for

preserving privacy, patent etc.

• Misconduct is completely unacceptable

– Fabrication of data ,

– selective reporting of data with the intent to mislead or


– theft of data or research results from others.



Ethics and Responsibilities of


Publication & Authorship Practices

• Th The authors' th ' central t l obligation bli ti is i tto present t a concise, i accurate t account t of f the th

research. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit

others to repeat the work.

• Proper acknowledgment. Authors should cite publications that have been

iinfluential fl ti l in i determining d t i i th the nature t of f the th reported t d work. k Information I f ti obtained bt i d

privately, as in conversation, correspondence, or discussion with third parties,

should not be used or reported without explicit permission from the investigator

with whom the information originated. Information obtained in the course of

confidential services services, such as refereeing manuscripts or grant applications


cannot be used without permission of the author of the work being used.

• Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution

to the concept, design, execution, or interpretation of the research study. All

those who have made significant contributions should be offered the opportunity

to be listed as authors. Other individuals who have contributed to the study

should be acknowledged, but not identified as authors. The sources of financial

support for the project should be disclosed.

• Plagiarism constitutes unethical scientific behavior and is never acceptable acceptable.

• It is unethical for an author to publish manuscripts describing essentially the

same research in more than one journal of primary publication. Submitting the

same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently is unethical and



• When an error is discovered in a published work, it is the obligation of all

authors to promptly retract the paper or correct the results.




• All collaborators ll b t share h responsibility ibilit ffor any paper th they coauthor. th

• Only persons who have significantly contributed to the research

should be listed as authors authors. The author who submits the paper for

publication should ensure that all appropriate coauthors and no

inappropriate coauthors are included on the paper, and that all

coauthors have seen the final version of the paper and have agreed

to its submission for publication publication.

• Some coauthors have responsibility for the entire paper as an

accurate, verifiable report of the research. These include, for

example, l coauthors th who h are accountable t bl ffor th the iintegrity t it of f th the

critical data reported in the paper, carry out the analysis, write the

manuscript, present major findings at conferences, or provide

scientific leadership for junior colleagues. Other coauthors may have

responsibility ibilit mainly i l for f specific, ifi limited li it d contributions t ib ti tto

a paper.

• Every coauthor should have the opportunity to review the

manuscript before it is submitted for publication publication. All coauthors have

an obligation to provide prompt retractions or correction of errors in

published works. Any individual unwilling or unable to accept

appropriate responsibility for a paper should not be a coauthor.

Editorial Responsibilities

• The editor of a journal has complete responsibility and authority to

accept a submitted paper for publication or to reject it. The editor may

confer with associate editors or reviewers for an evaluation to use in

making g this decision.

• An editor should give prompt and unbiased consideration to all

manuscripts offered for publication, judging each on its merits without

regard to race, race gender gender, religious belief, belief ethnic origin origin, citizenship citizenship, or

political philosophy of the authors, and respecting the intellectual

independence of the authors. Situations that may lead to real or

perceived conflicts of interest should be avoided.

• The editor and the editorial staff should not disclose any information

about a manuscript under consideration to anyone other than reviewers

and potential p reviewers. Unpublished p information, , arguments, g , or

interpretations disclosed in a submitted manuscript should not be used

in an editor's own research except with the consent of the author.

• An editor presented with convincing evidence that the substance or

conclusions of a published paper are erroneous should promote the

publication of a correction or retraction.



Peer Review

• Review by y independent p scientists pprovides advice to editors of scientific jjournals

concerning the publication of research results. It is an essential component of the

scientific enterprise, and all scientists have an obligation to participate in the


• Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept

confidential and not used for competitive gain. Reviewers must disclose conflicts of

interest resulting from direct competitive, collaborative, or other relationships with

any of the authors, and avoid cases in which such conflicts preclude an objective


• RReviewers i should h ld jjudge d objectively bj ti l th the quality lit of f th the research h reported t d and d respect t

the intellectual independence of the authors. In no case is personal criticism

appropriate. Reviewers should explain and support their judgments in such a way

that editors and authors may understand the basis of their comments.

• Reviewers should point out relevant published work that has not been cited by the

authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been

previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer

should also call to the editor's attention any substantial similarity between the

manuscript p under consideration and any y ppublished ppaper p or manuscript p submitted

concurrently to another journal.

• A reviewer should treat a manuscript sent for review as a confidential document. It

should neither be shown to nor discussed with others except, in special cases, to

persons from whom specific advice may be sought; in that event, the identities of

th those consulted lt d should h ld bbe di disclosed l d tto th the editor. dit

• Reviewers should not use or disclose unpublished information, arguments, or

interpretations contained in a manuscript under consideration, except with the

consent of the author.





• Start from the listeners!

• Figure out what they want to know.

• Select the important parts of your paper.

• Be prepared to skip parts of it.

• You may present it in another way or order

compared to the paper paper.

News Headlines Method

• News headlines: right at the start, start present the results of the paper (in the

form of a list with results or orally). Try to make the listeners interested!

• Title: show clearly y what is inside.

• Outline: an overview of the presentation is shown.

• Background and introduction: the audience is introduced to the subject

and the studied problem, e.g., by presenting an example.

• Related work. How others have tried to solve the problem?

• The main part: Method and the results described. Supporting

arguments, investigations and sources described. A few technical details


• Summary: as an ending can you summarize your presentation and

discuss open problems, future work , reading tips, references to

interesting web pages etc.

• Thank you. Any questions?



A few Don’ts

• Don't impress the audience with hairy

theory. y Avoid a lot of technical details.

– Use motivating diagrams/examples instead.

– Avoid to be too wordy.

• Don't present p more material than yyou


to: rather spend more time on one thing.

• Don't hide the problems with your method:

they'll y find out…

Have some notes

• If you y use slides yyou

can write the

supporting notes you need on copies of

the slides. You may y also need some extra

material with additional notes.

•Do not write your presentation word for

word and then read it for the audience –

this gives a dull impression.



• Speak clearly!


• A good way for non-native speaker is to

speak k slowly l l

– Generally one slide one minute.

• Pretend that you are talking to the last


Respect Time Limits!

• Respect the planned time. Clock your

presentation in rehearsal rehearsal.

• Be prepared to remove the less important

slides lid at t the th end, d if you get t lack l k of f time. ti

Decide which before!

– Often at conferences, the chair of the session

will warn you when there is some minutes left,

and d when h your ti time iis up, h he/she / h may even

stop you from finishing! This is not the last

impression you want to give the audience audience.



• Face the audience.

Your pose

• Do not put your hands into your pockets!

• Do not face the white board or the slides slides.

Prepare Q&A

• Decide in advance if the audience may interrupt

for questions, or if you want to take them at the


• Try to identify the questions to your presentation,

and formulate your answers. Parts of these

answers you may want tt to give i even if not tasked! k d!

• YYou can also l prepare extra t material t i l or slides lid

which answer the questions you anticipate, just

in case!




• Give your presentation in advance advance, with or

without listeners, and correct the things

that do not work well well.

– It is i very helpful h l f l ffor beginners. b i

• Clock the presentation.

Stage g fright g

• There is no simple recipe concerning stage

fi fright. htSome S nervousness is i normal land dmeans

that you are sharp.

• A way to master the problem is to be well

prepared prepared. Then you feel safer and this often

reduces the nervousness.

• Also remember that training gives skill! In this

course you get the chance to train in front of

fellow students.



Dealing g with Questions Q

• The self-admirer: "Have you read Dr. Putz'


– The person just want to show his knowledge or

experience to the rest of the audience.

– Compliment p the gguy, y, then move on.

• The attacker: "Your work is boring/irrelevant/


– He wants to get a point or two by showing

weaknesses in your work.

– Be polite, you may say we can discuss this

afterwards afterwards.

• Genuine interest

– The most welcome question. Try to answer correctly

and d hhonestly. tl DDon't 't be b afraid f id t to say "I ddon't 't know" k "

when you don't!

The student presentation




To be held here, , Week 13

You will each be required to give a short talk

on either:

Th Thursday d 28. 28 AApril il (All part-time students +

additional FT students)


Two other days in Week 13 (to be arranged

between 26 26-29 29 April and announced)

Title of Presentation (think (

about it!!!)

Frightened Smith

Nanyang Technological University

@ t d





4) 4)…..



Your Presentation – Details:

I will email you all stating on when your

presentation t ti will ill bbe.

You should present no more than 4-5

slides and take no more that 7 minutes


Background / Introduction /


1) What Am I doing? Give an example

2) Why am I doing it?

3) Related work – how have others

tried to solve the problem(s)

4) Method of your work/Diagrams



Main Part and Conclusions

1) Method and Results Results.

2) Supporting theoretical arguments –

why did it work???

3) A few technical details details.

4) Summary, future ideas.


More magazines by this user
Similar magazines