sci.research.careers

On Wed, 12 Sep 2007, thinktank wrote:

> Actually recently I submitted a paper to an international
> conference...a single author paper with my name. The paper has been
> accepted. However I am still confused about the copy right form. There
> is a section where it requires an institutional signature.

What exactly does it say?

> The work I did was completely my own, and was not supported by
> anybody, not even my institute. I am actually an undergraduate
> student. Since I am not professionally linked to any institute do I
> still need to get an institutional signature as such?

Since you did the work yourself (you said you submitted a paper to an
international conferece, was this "paper" an _abstract_ or longer (more
than one page?), you could sign at both places, you as author and you as
institutional representative. Or, you could wait for them to send you a
letter saying your work is accepted pending your copyright form.

Please tell us what this form says. It could be a harmless permission to
reproduce your work and that you will not publish the same elsewhere.

> I had done an internship at GE Labs around an year ago. After coming
> back from that place, I decided to work on a related problem.
^^^^^^^

"Related" could get you into patent trouble if there is anything of
commercial value in the original area of work and since GE is a big
robber-barron corporation, you'd better think about how _related_ or
_unrelated_ your problem is to whatever you did there.

Since I
> already knew the techniques on how to deal with the problem,

Before you did your internship at GE?

I didnt
> really need any guide. I could undoubtedly get my advisor there to be
> the second author, however, if he has to be the co author, it has to
> be ratified by GE, due to various IP related policies. That is why I
> had sent the work only in my name, since it was done entirely by me, I
> had no problem in doing so.

If you were thinking about putting your GE advisor on the paper, then you
had to have a reason to have a second author and would that reason be that you
wanted a 'crutch' to help this get published or maybe that your advisor
'helped' you more than you may have realized or admit?

> I would be grateful if somebody of you guys could help me out. I have
> been asking a lot of my seniors, but nobody seems to know the answer.

Look, everyone wants to get a publication record going and its always
nicer to have your name closer to the 'first author' position and even as
sole author, buuuut please consider what I am about to tell you:

1. It ALMOST ALWAYS looks _better_ to have 'company' on that author line.
There are almost no more 'lone wolves' in science anymore. Everything is a
_collaboration_ and _teams_ of scientists are the normall, common, rule.

2. It is ALWAYS a prestigeous thing to have a big name institution on that
institutional affiliation line along with your team, and GE would look
good to anyone reading whatever you wrote and it would have helped your
track record to have that there.

3. Please, please, please...all these people around you and the whole of
scientific history (more so in recent decades than in the distant past) is
about collaboration, communication, and community. Please, please,
please...you say you've been "asking a lot of [your] seniors" and they
don't know. The people you should be asking are your advisors, mentors,
and people who have been doing this for longer than you. The first guy to
talk with about this would be your GE advisor and if you want to keep the
glory to yourself, just don't talk about like you already did this, or
would do it without asking him. Just bring up the idea of what would it
take to get a paper published and "...by the way, could you help or be
co-author" on this?

I can tell you that you might be doing yourself a lot of damage if, for
example, one or more of those guys at GE just happened to see whatever you
submitted under your own name and get very pissed off about it.

You will really need all those guys at GE as references and guys who might
write letters of recommendation (if you did well) for the future. You
don't want to offend them. It always looks good if your letters of
recommendation have names of guys who are also co-authors on any papers
you publish (even if your "institution" is your garage, closet, or kitchen
sink).

You may have an option if you do a lot of work very quickly: you can talk
with your GE advisor and see if he will be a co-author and then revise
what you sent in to add his name. Of course, he might want to see what you
wrote before giving you this. Then, there is the IP procedure at GE. You
see, it becomes very awkward for you and all kinds of things can go wrong
and you have a blemish on your track record.

Whatever you do in the future, you would do much better if you openly
talked with your bosses, advisors, professors, teachers, etc., about
things BEFORE you do anything. And, talk with more than one. Preferably
two or three. The absolute best thing for you is to make "friends" with as
many people who are your mentors, bosses, advisors, professors, etc.,
because it is these people who will be instrumental in opening doors for
whatever you do in the future and you would be best to stay in contact
with all of them for decades, even if nothing more than a Christmas card
or telephone call once a year.

FYI, my science career website is:




Good luck, otherwise.