Dr.

Marian Mamdouh
Faculty of Engineering
Electronic and communication
department
The Heart Of The Research
 Finding Research Projects
➢ As we begin the process of identifying a Problem
suitable research problem to tackle, we
should keep two criteria in mind
Many Questions
1. Our problem should answer the
Should make
question in such a way that the Answers
Difference

answer should “make a difference”.

2. It should advance the frontiers of
Frontiers of Knowledge
knowledge, perhaps by leading to new
New way of Thinking Paving way for
ways of thinking, suggesting possible Suggestion Possible frontier
Applications Research
applications, or paving the way for
further research in the field.
To accomplish both of these, our research project must involve not
only the collection of data but also the interpretation of those data.
 PRACTICAL APPLICATION
Identifying and Describing the Research Problem

GUIDELINES : Finding a Legitimate Problem

➢ We must be sufficiently knowledgeable about our topic of
interest to know what problem might make important
contributions to the field.
➢ The strategies that are of helpful for novice and expert
researchers are
1. Look around you: In many disciplines, questions that need answer,
phenomena that need explanation are everywhere. Perhaps we
might see them in our professional practice or in everyday
events. We should ask questions continually about what we see
and hear. Why does such and such happen?
GUIDELINES :Finding a Legitimate Problem
2. Read the literature: One essential strategy is to find
out what things are already about our topic of
interest. The existing literature is likely to tell us
about what is not known in the area. In other
words, what still needs to be done. For instance
our research project might
▪ Replicate a research project in a different setting or with
a different population
▪ Consider how various subpopulations might behave
differently in the same situation
▪ Apply an existing perspective or theory to a new
situation
▪ Explore unexpected or contradictory finding in previous
studies
▪ Challenge research finding that seem to contradict what
you know or believe to be true.
 GUIDELINES :Finding a Legitimate Problem
3. Attend professional conferences:
▪ Many researchers have great success in finding new research projects
at national or regional conferences in their discipline.
▪ By attending the conferences researchers can learn what’s hot and what’s
not in their field.
▪ Conferences are a place where novice researchers can make contacts with
the experts in their field , ask questions, share ideas and exchange e-mail
addresses with more experienced and knowledgeable individuals.

▪ Seek the advice of experts: Simple yet highly effective strategy for
identifying a research problem is simply to ask an expert. e.g., We can
ask our guide
GUIDELINES : Finding a Legitimate Problem
4. Choose a topic that intrigues and motivates :
▪ Reading professional literature, attending conferences and
talking with experts uncovers a number of potential research
problems.
▪ We should pick one of the problem in which we believe its
worth investing the time and effort.
5. Choose a topic that others will find interesting and
worthy of attention :
▪ Our work should not end with a thesis, dissertation, or other
unpublished research report.
▪ Our work should add an important piece to what human
being know and understand about the world.
 Definition of Scientific paper
• An accepted original scientific publication containing
scientific information to enable peers:
1. To assess observations
2. To repeat experiments
3. To evaluate intellectual processes
4. Must have an impact
5. Available to scientific community without restriction
6. Available for regular screening by one or more of the
major recognized secondary services (Biological
abstracts, Index Medicus, Pub Med etc…)
 Why Write a Scientific Paper
• Advance knowledge in your research field with
evidence.
• Explain your ideas and make them accessible to
others.
• Two key components in a research paper:
– An explicit claim on your contribution on a research
problem.
– Evidence to support your claim.

• Your contribution can possibly be a refutation of a

hypothesis on the research problem.
 What to Claim for a Scientific Paper
• Your technique solves a problem for the first
time.
• Your technique performs better, in one or more
of the following dimensions than its rivals:
o Behavior: X has a higher success rate than Y or
produces better quality outputs, e.g. shorter, easier to
understand, more similar to human outputs, etc.
o Coverage: X is applicable to a wider range of examples
than Y.
o Efficiency: X is faster or uses less space than Y.
o Usability: Users find X easier to use than its rivals.
 What to Know Before You Write
• Assess the audience:
▪ To whom are you writing?
▪ Why will they be reading your writing?

• Assess the purpose:

▪ What should the reader take away?

• Read other people’s writing from the forums that you

are targeting
▪ Language skills and the writing style are always important.
▪ A paper published in one top journal can easily get rejected by
another top journal – community difference or cultural difference.

• Follow the rules – length limits, formatting standards

etc.
 How to Present a Convincing Case
➢ What exactly is the problem being solved?

➢ How are your ideas significant (to justify a paper)?

o Some ideas are so simple that have been used many times being
published

➢ Is all related work referenced and reviewed?

➢ Are the comparative studies with previous work convincing?

➢ Has your system been implemented and used, and if so

what did it demonstrate from the real world (for you and
the reader to learn)?
 In-Depth Analysis of Empirical Results
• Enough details for
a) Your experiment settings (so that other researchers can verify and improve
your results).
b) Your experimental objectives.
c) What were the alternatives considered at various points of your
experiments?
d) Why and how have you made the choices for your experiments?

• Can you fine-tune some key parameters to get better or worse results?
If so, use figures and tables to show their impacts on your system
performances
• How do the experimental results correspond to the motivation of the
paper?
• What have you found surprising and tried to avoid in these
experiments? How generally applicable are these lessons?
 The Title
• A good title is defined as the fewest possible words
that adequately describe the contents of the paper.
• The title is extremely important and must be chosen
with great care as it will be read by thousands,
whereas few will read the entire paper.
• Indexing and abstracting of the paper depends on
the accuracy of the title.
• An improperly titled paper will get lost and will
never be read.
 The Title
• Titles should neither be too short nor too long as to be
meaningless
• Waste words (studies on, investigations on, a, an, the
etc) should not be used.
• Syntax (word order) must be very carefully considered.
• It should contain the keywords that reflect the
contents of the paper.
• It should be meaningful and not general
• It should be concise, specific and informative
• It should capture the fundamental nature of the
experiments and findings
 How to Prepare the Title
• Make a list of the most important keywords.
• Think of a title that contains these words.
• The title could state the conclusion of the paper.
• The title NEVER contains abbreviations, chemical
formulas, proprietary names or jargon.
• Think, rethink of the title before submitting the
paper.
• Be very careful of the grammatical errors due to
faulty word order.
• Avoid the use of the word “using” .
 The Abstract
• An abstract can be defined as a summary of the information
in a document.
• It is of fundamental importance that the abstract be written
clearly and simply, as it is the first and sometimes the only
part of the manuscript read.
• It should provide a brief summary of each of the main
sections of the paper:
1. State the principal objective and scope of the investigation.
2. Describe the methods used.
3. Summarize the results.
4. State the principal conclusions.
• It is easier to write the abstract after completion of the
paper
 Criteria of the Abstract
• It should not exceed 250 words.
• It should be written in one paragraph.
• It should be written in the past tense as it refers to work
done.
• Long words should be followed by its abbreviation which
would be used through out the abstract and paper.
• It should not cite any references (except in rare cases).
• It should never give any information or conclusion that is not
stated in the paper.
• Must be accurate with respect to figures quoted in the main
text.
 Abstract

• Common Mistakes

– Too much background or methods information.

– Figures or images.

– References to other literature, figures or images.

– Abbreviations or acronyms.
 Summary
1. It is NOT enough to design yet another technique or system
without convincing evaluation

2. You should avoid claiming too many dimensions, but one or two
with in-depth evidence

3.Know your enemy: Check who are on the program committee or

editorial board, and cite their relevant work with due credit

4. Choose a promising topic

5. Are the experimental results consistent and conclusive?

6. A good introduction with a good motivation is half of your success!