Science topics: Composition StudiesEditing
Science topic
Editing - Science topic
Explore the latest questions and answers in Editing, and find Editing experts.
Questions related to Editing
When I submit my manuscript, the editors always comment my manuscript that it looks like a report and not scientific article. I have introduction, lit review, methodology, results, findings and conclusion in my manuscript. Why most editors think my manuscript is more like a report and rejected my manuscript since I have everything as other papers they accepted? How do editors define report and article?
What, in your opinion, is a reliable, objective, professional and thus really contributing to the effective development of science reviewing of scientific papers, diploma theses, dissertations containing the results of scientific research, text proposals sent to the editorial office for publication as scientific publications, including scientific articles, scientific monographs, etc.?
The reviewing of scientific articles by scientists specialised in a particular field of knowledge, conducted in the editorial process, is essential for maintaining a high level of scientific publications and for the development of scientific journals. However, there are times when it can be problematic and cumbersome for scientists who work in narrow, specific specialisations, fields, scientific disciplines.
On the one hand, it is widely accepted that the evaluation of a scientific paper during the peer review process should take into account and usually does take into account at least a dozen factors concerning both substantive issues, research, reference to the literature, timeliness of research results, correctness of inference, editorial quality, effects on the development of science, etc. The assessment of a scientific work during peer review should be carried out objectively, independently, fairly, according to a high level of assessment standards. Therefore, editorial activity, proofreading, editorial correction, scientific reviews, etc. should be carried out according to the applicable standards in order to maintain a certain level of scientific quality of published scientific work.
On the other hand, on the discussion forum of this Research Gate portal, many questions arise regarding the issue of objectivity and fairness in reviewing scientific papers. Yes, the processes of reviewing scientific texts proposed for publication is a serious issue. The issue of the level of objectivity and independence of reviewing scientific papers can influence the direction of science in narrow specialisations and scientific disciplines. The significant variation in the standards of reviewing processes, editorial processes, etc. between different editors of journals and other types of scientific publications is an important factor in considering the issue of the level of objectivity and the problems that arise in this regard. In order for the editorial and reviewing process to be fully objective and independent, among other things, institutional affiliation should not influence the editors' decision to publish a scientific paper and the assessment in the review of the text, manuscript by the reviewers. Unfortunately, however, it sometimes happens that institutional affiliation is taken into account in such situations.
An important element of maintaining a certain level of objectivity in the reviewing process of scientific papers is the application of the model of more than one review in the editorial boards of scientific journals and editorial boards of book publications and monographs, i.e. the standard of min. Two reviews written independently by other researchers and scientists operating in a given discipline of knowledge and/or who are recognised experts in a given issue. Consequently, the multi-review model is important as it should contribute to the improvement of scientific texts. The double (two reviews) review process for scientific papers raises the issue of the objectivity of the review process and is an important element of the editorial process. In some editorial boards of scientific journals and editorial boards of book publications and monographs, the model of 3 reviews is also applied, in which the third review plays an auxiliary and sometimes a decisive role in relation to the previous two reviews written, in which significantly different assessments appeared, different points of view on the given issue described in the reviewed scientific work.
In addition, there are other factors that are important for researchers and scientists, such as the length of the review process of submitted text proposals for publication and the period after which they receive a response from the editorial office. Sometimes the review and editorial processes take a long time. This is determined by various factors. During the SARS-CoV-2 (Covid-19) coronavirus pandemic, organising conferences in a traditional, desktop format and post-referral publication processes were difficult. An important issue is the communication standards in place in a given scientific publication editorial board. These standards can also vary widely, as some editorial offices write back with an e-mail response regarding the results of an evaluation, a review conducted, an editorial correction or feedback confirming receipt of a text, etc., within a period of several days or so after the text has been sent to the editorial office publishing a particular scientific text. However, there are also editors who write back with a response much later. For scientists and researchers, waiting a long time for a reply can be problematic in a situation where they are continuing their research in a particular field of knowledge, they are receiving new, new research results and the field or scientific discipline in which they are conducting research is developing rapidly.
The issues of the length of the review process, the process of editing a manuscript proposal submitted for publication, the issue of communication between the editorial office and the manuscript author may also be related to the acceptance by authors of journals that are not highly ranked in terms of recognition, reputation, Impact Factor, etc. If journals with a high Impact Factor are difficult to access due to the long review process and high publication costs, some researchers and scientists who want to publish their research results quickly publish in journals without Impact Factor. In addition, some journals without Impact Factor have other positive features, such as the inclusion of published articles in many scientific publication indexing databases and all this under the open access formula without any payment.
In the context of the issue at hand, the editorial requirements set by the editors of scientific journals for the preparation of articles and other texts for publication are also relevant. On the one hand, the standards of reviewing and editorial requirements sometimes vary widely between journals. On the other hand, meeting all editorial requirements in full may limit the issue of innovation in terms of the research conducted and its description and presentation in scientific publications. This is a complex issue that affects many scientific fields, the research conducted and the description of its results in specific types of scientific publications written according to the editorial standards of specific editors and scientific publishers.
Another issue of discussion in the context of the reviewing process of scientific texts is the progressive digitisation of documents. This process should encourage remote communication via e.g. email, and should assist in the editorial process concerning preparatory work prior to the publication of scientific texts. The issue of the progressive digitisation of documents and their increasingly automated digital processing is linked to the use of new ICT information technologies and Industry 4.0, including artificial intelligence, e.g. technology similar to ChatGPT to improve computerised applications and Internet-connected anti-plagiarism platforms used to verify texts during the process of reviewing scientific texts. I wrote about this issue in one of the previously formulated questions on my discussion forum of this Research Gate portal.
Counting on your opinions, on getting to know your personal opinion, on an honest approach to the discussion of scientific issues and not the ready-made answers generated in ChatGPT, I deliberately used the phrase "in your opinion" in the question.
In view of the above, I address the following question to the esteemed community of scientists and researchers:
What, in your opinion, consists in a reliable, objective, professional and thus really contributing to the effective development of science reviewing of scientific works, theses, dissertations containing the results of scientific research, text proposals sent to the editorial office for publication as scientific publications, including scientific articles, scientific monographs, etc.?
In your opinion, what is a reliable, objective, professional review of scientific papers, theses, etc.?
What do you think about this topic?
What is your opinion on this subject?
Please respond,
I invite you all to discuss,
Thank you very much,
Best wishes,
Dariusz Prokopowicz
The above text is entirely my own work written by me based on my research.
In writing this text, I did not use other sources or automatic text generation systems.
Copyright by Dariusz Prokopowicz
Dear researchers, scientists, friends, participants in the discussion forum of this Research Gate portal
In my opinion, the development of scientific cooperation, establishing contacts on scientific social networks, online discussion forums operating on online science portals, seeking researchers and scientists to conduct team scientific research, write scientific multi-author papers, participate in scientific conferences and symposia, team search for cooperation to exchange views, express one's own opinion on specific scientific topics, inspire each other to seek interesting topics of research papers, etc. not to generate bad emotions, to inspire bad words and actions, to look for what divides us, to provoke emotional quarrels, etc. This is my opinion, according to which I function in various areas of my activity, including my scientific, research activities and in this discussion forum of the Research Gate portal. It worries me, I am sorry to say, that on some discussion threads, within the framework of ongoing discussions, some participants in the discussion act as if they have a completely different opinion on the above issue. Of course, each of us may have a different opinion on various topics, but this is not a reason to insult others, inspire arguments, stir up bad emotions, use ineloquent vocabulary, use inappropriate epithets, accuse someone of doing what he does not do, behave in a way that is not befitting of educated people, provoke unethical behavior, and so on. I, on many occasions on various discussion threads, in discussions on various topics, when I noticed bad emotions, I noticed attempts to escalate bad emotions on the part of some participants in the discussion then, addressing the entire community of researchers and scientists, I asked for substantive discussions, not to generate bad emotions, not to provoke anger, I asked for respect for all participants in the discussion regardless of what cultures they represent, what backgrounds they come from, what scientific backgrounds they represent, and so on. Besides, I always address the entire community of researchers, scientists, participants in the discussion forum and not per persona, not directly to a specific person, because in my opinion, addressing per persona is inappropriate if we do not know each other in real life, have never met outside the Internet, etc. But this is also just my opinion. I am not trying to prove anything with these words, I am not urging anything, I am not suggesting anything, I am just expressing my opinion on a particular issue. If I ever offended anyone with any words, if anyone ever reading what I write felt offended, felt worse, then I apologize. Bad intentions have never been, are not and will not be the goal of my scientific or any other activity. I fully understand that it will never be the case that all people agree with each other on everything. The fact that there are different opinions on certain topics is also a source of interesting discussions and can inspire the development of new solutions, the development of new concepts, also new concepts of scientific research, the formulation of an innovative topic of scientific work. However, I believe that we should focus on what unites us, not what divides us. This is my opinion. There are many problems to be solved in which the development of science and the technological advances taking place can help. There are many global problems of the development of civilization that we as humanity can solve, that perhaps we will solve in the future. By attempting to solve them, we hope to solve at least some of the global problems of the development of civilization. We will certainly increase the likelihood and scale of solving problems if we cooperate and not look for reasons to develop negative emotions and insult each other and disrespect each other. Of course, if any of you, any of the participants in the discussion forum of the Research Gate portal think otherwise then I will also respect the other opinion and it will not be a reason for me to escalate bad emotions. It's just the way I am, that escalating bad emotions is not in my nature, I don't prefer it, I don't like it. I hope I will be respected that this is just the way I am. Once again, I will reiterate for the sake of full clarity, because perhaps my words were ever interpreted differently than I meant them when I wrote them. If anyone ever felt offended by my words then I apologize. It was not my intention to offend anyone. I try to respect every other opinion, I don't look for what divides us, I focus on what can connect us. And what can unite us is scientific cooperation in solving various more or less important problems, including the most important global problems of civilization development, which in the current 21st century are increasing and there are many indications that they may increase in the future, develop, increase their scale. For the sake of completeness, an example of such a global problem of civilization development is the global climate crisis, which we will not solve alone. But we can increase the scale of solving this problem, or at least reduce the level of action of the negative effects of the global climate crisis, when we act together on the basis of cooperation, mutual respect, willingness to look for what unites us and not what divides us. In view of the above, I invite you to scientific cooperation on various issues concerning the global climate crisis, the progressive process of global warming, the development of the negative effects of these processes and attempts to counteract them, the implementation of the goals of sustainable economic development, climate and environmental social responsibility, the green transformation of the economy, etc., as well as on other issues and topics in which we participate in various discussions, conduct scientific work, research and publish the results of our research in scientific publications.
Best regards,
Dariusz Prokopowicz
For the sake of full clarity, so that I am not again suspected of being assisted by pseudo-intelligent agents, habots I declare that the above text is an expression of my personal opinion, it is fully my author's work, written by me on the basis of conducted research.
In writing this text I did not use other sources or automatic text generation systems.
Copyright by Dariusz Prokopowicz
Hello!
I am learning how to edit TEM images in Fiji (Image J).
I want to highlight some specific areas of my images using colors.
Can somebody help?
Thank you!
Dear all
Our new article "About Probiotics" is ready for final submission after two peer reviews. However, the reviewer and editor recommend minor grammatical corrections in MS either by a native English speaker colleague or to avail paid online grammar editing service. We do not have sufficient funds to bear the cost, nor do a native speaker, what should we do in this case, the MS has already taken more than 6 months, please suggest.
Thanks a lot for your attention. Have a great day.
In your opinion, how to build an IT anti-plagiarism system that will verify essays written by students in schools and credit and diploma theses written by students in universities, taking into account the issue of possible and incompatible with the rules of the school, university use of automatic text generation tools, use of artificial intelligence, including, for example, ChatGPT? ChatGPT, i.e. taking into account the issue of the author's observance of copyright, correct use of sources, from other publications, reliable independent editing of the text of the essay, thesis, including bachelor's, master's, doctoral and other theses?
One solution may be to build an IT anti-plagiarism system, which would also use artificial intelligence solutions analysing the degree of similarity between texts written by pupils in school essays and theses written by students in universities with texts generated by e.g. ChatGPT and concerning the same issues.
However, before such a computerised anti-plagiarism system can be used to verify essays written by students at schools and pass theses and diploma theses written by students at universities, taking into account the possible use of artificial intelligence, including e.g. ChatGPT, certain changes should be made to the rules and regulations of schools, colleges and universities, taking particular account of the author's observance of copyright, the correct use of sources and other publications, and reliable, independent editing of essays, diploma theses, including bachelor's, master's, doctoral and other theses. Besides, before such an IT anti-plagiarism system is built, other supplementary and auxiliary solutions can be applied.
Another solution may be for teachers to require pupils and students to reliably, fully, methodologically demonstrate the data sources, source publications for all specific phrases, wording, content, information, statements, for every sentence that was not written from the author's own autopsy, the author's own experience of the work, etc. used in the written essay, credit work and other work. This type of solution may also be helpful on the issue of verification of the accuracy of the writing, i.e. without the use of a ChatGPT-type tool carried out by an IT anti-plagiarism system, which will verify this issue by comparing the content of the written work with the knowledge base used by ChatGPT. Therefore, it may be necessary to make the knowledge base used by ChatGPT (currently a knowledge base created on the basis of content downloaded in 2021 from a number of selected websites) available to IT companies developing IT anti-plagiarism systems that verify the above-mentioned issue of the reliability of the written text, i.e. without the use of a ChatGPT-type tool.
Another interim solution for the period before the creation of an IT anti-plagiarism system to verify the accuracy of the writing, i.e. without the use of the ChatGPT tool, could be for teachers to require their students to prepare and carry out project work requiring the use of various aspects of creativity as an alternative to written essays, credit essays and dissertations.
In view of the above, I address the following question to the esteemed community of scientists and researchers:
How, in your opinion, to build an IT anti-plagiarism system that will verify essays written by students at schools and credit and diploma theses written by students at universities, taking into account the issue of possible and incompatible with the rules of the school, university use of automatic text generation tools, use of artificial intelligence, including e.g. ChatGPT, i.e. taking into account the issue of the author's observance of copyright, correct use of sources, from other publications, reliable independent editing of the text of the essay, thesis, including bachelor's, master's, doctoral and other theses?
How to build an IT-based anti-plagiarism system that will verify the theses and dissertations written by students for possible use in their ChatGPT?
What do you think about this topic?
What is your opinion on this subject?
Please respond,
I invite you all to discuss,
Thank you very much,
Counting on your opinions, on getting to know your personal opinion, on an honest approach to discussing scientific issues and not the ready-made answers generated in ChatGPT, I deliberately used the phrase "in your opinion" in the question.
The above text is entirely my own work written by me on the basis of my research.
I have not used other sources or automatic text generation systems such as ChatGPT in writing this text.
Copyright by Dariusz Prokopowicz
Best wishes,
Dariusz Prokopowicz
Hi everyone
Language editing is a major concern for authors who do not have English as their primary language. Problems with grammar, language, and syntax can result in the rejection of manuscripts from international biomedical Journals. The editors and experts often recommend professional editing which can sometimes cost hundreds of dollars. This is not feasible nor affordable for the majority of authors and researchers based in developing countries who do not have sufficient funds or institutional support.
Many online language editing softwares are now available but the better ones have limited functionality for the free version for example Grammarly.
Please share your experience of using online language editing software with their and strengths and shortcomings. I have been Trinka for 4 months now with excellent results and would highly recommend it
It is the world’s first grammar and language enhancement tool is custom-built for academic & technical writing. Its standout features are that it works with the author and goes beyond the grammar and spellcheck to ensure holistic language enhancement.
If you have not tried it yet, Sign up for a free account from this link
Share your experience of other software too
Have you used the article summarizer Scholarcy https://www.scholarcy.com/? What was your experience with it? Can you tell me how accurate the summarized information is?
Thanks in advance for your answers!
How do you edit a project? There is no "edit" button associated with it.
Our faculty intends to write and edit a case book for undergraduate students. We intend to download and add available WHO guidelines in the field of paediatrics.
Here are three websites that say they have continued the work of Beall's List, which was discontinued due to harassment.
https://beallslist.net/ -- Updated URL
If you have a publisher or a journal that you need to check, I suggest checking all three of these lists.
If you already use one or more of these sites, which do you think is best maintained?
Shouldn't current practices regarding plagiarism be revised? What is your opinion?
Hello,
I have been searching what is the best outlier detection algorithm but I have started to confused which algorithm is better. Because there are many ways to detect the outliers but which one is better for orbit determination. I was reading a book which is written by Bruce P. Gibbs The person mentioned about Outlier detection but it is only a few pages, there is no more information. He introduced two way which are De-Weighting Large Residual and Data Editing. He said Data editing used with much more success in satellite orbit determination. Who has the experience with outlier detection for orbit determination? Can you give a few tips about that?
EDITED:
The Algorithms;
1) 𝑿^𝟐=〖(𝒚−𝒉(𝒙))〗^𝑻 𝑺^(−𝟏) (𝒚−𝒉(𝒙))
2) Residual(i) > 3√(HP 𝐻^𝑇 + R)
3) 3-Sigma
I have applied three algorithms to find the outliers. First one is Chi Square Test, second checks Measurement Covariance Noise, Third looks the 3 sigma.
If the the residual magnitude is less the algorithms performance are good but if the residuals are large, the algorithm performances are not good.
Some timers just an example (it is time not timers) there are such mistakes because of autospell. Is it possible to edit our answer and make corrections in RG answers?
Share your experience about references in a research article, review article, and thesis.
I need a help form you. One of my papers has been accepted by CATENA, Elsevier.
But with the minor revision, they want Standard English as per their journal.
For this, they also advised me to take profession English editing service, but , I can’t afford that service.
I try my level best, but it is still not sufficient for their journal.
So, can anyone help me for this?
Please contact me
Looking for more options?
I'd like to introduce my company JournalEdit.
JournalEdit has been helping researchers worldwide with professional scientific editing since 2012. We have a global network of 300+ experienced scholars (PhD, MD) with expertise across medical, science, and engineering fields. All our editors are exclusively native English speakers and based in the US, UK, Canada, or Australia.
Our website: www.journaledit.com
As an introductory promotion for ResearchGate members, use promo code RG10 for a 10% discount. Or, if you visit our website & join our mailing list, we'll send you a discount for 20% off your first order!
Hello,
I am working on Heavy metals removal using adsorption (MX and SX adsorbents) and when i tried to apply Intra-particle diffusion model “IPD” of Weber and Morris i faced some problems.
qt = Kp t1/2 + C
The plots of qt versus t1/2 at different cadmium and copper initial concentrations show multi-linearity characterizations for 30, 40 and 50 mg/L but for 10 and 20 mg/L plot is nearly linear.
In some papers, two or three phases are occurred in the adsorption process but for all concentrations .. For my kinetics results:
1- Should i divide each plot into two phases??
2- Kp and C values (Slope and intercept) should be calculated from the first phase or second phase?
3- what is the interpretation of the results i obtained in the attached excel file?
4- In sheet 5 (in the attached excel) i applied Langmuir and Freundlich model (plot of 6 points each point represents a concentration) but R2 was very bad vaule ... so in sheet 6 i repeated calculations (plot of 3 concentrations only) and R2 became much better .. ... Is this accepted in PhD thesis? or i should put the Charts in sheet 5 as it is whatever R2 be?
** The attached excel sheet show results, charts and question beside each chart.
If there is an ability to edit the excel sheet and reply to me with the edited excel sheet 'with answers' i will be very very grateful...
I really appreciate your help and your time to read my questions and review the attached file.
Thank you.
Falcon Scientific Editing is looking for contract editors! If you have a PhD, 2+ years of scientific editing experience, and are a native English speaker from the US or the UK, please send us your resume at career@falconediting.com.
My advisor has a Mac and uses Text Wrangler (which converts to fasta) and Se-Al (for mass editing) neither of which works on PCs. I've been having difficulties getting other programs to work. Any suggestions? Thanks for the help!
I would like to start introducing myself into LaTex but I lack coding skills. Does someome know a program / interface to easily edit a paper?
Thanks in advance.
I need to create a simple map. However, I have been unable to find something simple, and hopefully free (it should have layers such as roads and protected areas). I have tried some applications such as map box and google map creator, but they are full of unnecessary layers. If you could suggest a mapping utility to create simple maps it will be greatly appreciated.
Hello
I'm looking for a familiar guys with Open IMS core. Actually i wanna define a new authentifcation scheme for IMS network. so for performance evaluation purpose i'm gonna use the OPen IMS core with IMS bench SIpp.
can any one guide me what are the main files to edit in Open IMS core in order to define a new auth scheme
A lot of thanks
I would like to start editing part-time, but do not want the headache of freelancing on my own. I would prefer to work for a company. Can anyone help point me in the direction of some resources or companies that outsource proofreading or copyediting assignments?
I have a paper that the editor ask me to provide verification of official permission to make use of the MCNPX program for my work.
Representatives of this motifs are present in most sequenced members of the eubacterial, UmuC families and the MutS1. I found a paper from 2001 and would like to update the information (they used PSI-BLAST,NCBI etc with maual editing). Is there any tool for automatic/quicker search?
I am assuming that a journal standard would take precedence in such a situation, but what about when it's not explicitly stated? Also, would the omission of full stops for 'eg' in British English apply to 'i.e.' as well? So that it would be 'ie' and not 'i.e.'?
I have been invited to submit a paper for an edited book by colleagues in the past. And have jumped at the chances I have been offered. I have not found the guts to take the initiative a write a proposal for a publishing house to review. Many of us haven't either but have a positive attitude towards undertaking such a big step in our career. Editors I have worked with reminds me that it is a headache the only fact to deal with 10 or 12 authors each one with unique egos, styles, strategies to meet deadlines, etc. What does, then, take to become a book editor beyond the "all of the above" easy answer? Is book editing something to fear to the point of never ever considering writing that proposal for gatekeepers to know I have an idea worth while considering?
I have a ready for publication paper concerning spine correction but my English in this paper requires some corrections. Can anyone help me to solve the problem ?
What is the concept behind publishing study protocols for trials and meta-analyses before their actual conduct?
When a scientific protocol is written, is it ever appropriate to not use proper punctuation? When a portion of text appears after a bullet point, is it ever appropriate to omit a period? What about if such a line item constitutes a complete sentence?
I am aware that some scientists or researchers will try to avoid using brand names in their writing. When one must, should these words be capitalized? I was also wondering about using the phrase "Band aid" in scientific writing – should this be capitalized or even used?
