All Answers: Re: [pakgrid] Re: Productive Scientists

AoA.

We should not simply disregard/miss-regard the achievements by the "Gentleman Dr." with 82 papers. Exceptional cases are always there. Large number of PhD students and qualified ones may also act like chain reaction if their work is based on the work of the supervisor. Moreover, tricks (+ve or -ve) of a trade sometimes click exceptionally well. So there could be many factors and we can simply assume all of those working productive for him.

The basic topic of this discussion as initiated by Prof Dr. Arshad, was that Engineers are missing in the RPA list. And the point was to have a look on the formula for the candidates of RPA.

In this regard, an important fact is that (as mentioned by S. M. Husnine): "it is most likely that Engineers might not have applied for inclusion in this list. This is the case with many scientists in other fields as well". So every researcher should apply at first.

Moreover there should be some positive or formal move to put up request for revision of the RPA formula/criterion. The expert team should also include due representation from the Engineering community.

I would also comment on an Engineer's view (that Mr/Dr. Tanzeel raised). Remind that there are three layers one upon the other.

On the top, is the layer of Technology (as we view and get benefited)

Beneath the technology layer, there is layer of Engineering.

And beneath the engineering layer there is Science layer, at the base.

So Dr. Tanzeel, every product, the society and humanity get benefit from, comprises these three conceptual layers. Think of a fruit tree. We should not say that "Fruits and Leaves are very good" but the "stem and roots are useless".

This is quite a narrow point if someone says that the whole the world is standing solely on the shoulders of his field. In fact, every field of science, engineering, technology and arts contribute for the betterment of society and humanity (specifically to raise the life standards). So the RPA formula should consider every aspect and discipline accordingly.

At the last:

Note that if, on some special kind of competition/award, Engineers are not prominent than scientists (due to the formula of the competition), then there are certain other competitions where scientists cannot contribute/compete with engineers ---- again just due to the nature of that competition/award.

Final Words:

RPA is a very nice activity. Researchers all over the Pakistan have started looking to it. It should evolve/improve in composition/formula/criterion to address the concerns of every field in a rational manner.

Best Regards,

Muhammad Amjad Ali

On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 6:09 PM, Anjum Naveed <anjum.naveed@seecs.edu.pk> wrote:

Dear Colleagues,

In my humble opinion, even with 40 different students working under you, its still impossible as is it impossible with 10 students.

In case of 10 Grad students, the number of papers per student turns out to be 8. This within itself is 45 days per paper which is far beyond the capabilities of any student.

In case of 40 students, the topic of all of those students has to be different and then it becomes impossible for even a super Doctor to have significant enough contribution in each topic to become justifiable author of the paper. Its beyond human capability to even think on 40 different topics, let alone contribute to each of them through active research.

On a side note, we need to compare our distinguished scientists with the distinguished scientists around the world. Has any big name throughout the world achieved the feat of publishing so many papers in one year in any basic sciences subject? If not, we better highlight this contribution internationally. The best example I know is of Paul Erdos who published 1525 papers with 511 different collaborators. He achieved PhD at the age of 21, had 15 honorary PhDs and lived for 83 years. I think that record seems breakable and it will be an honor for our country with limited resources.

regards,
Anjum

On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 10:15 AM, Imran Kanjoo <imran_kanjoo@yahoo.com> wrote:

Well! Ashiq Anjum, it is a possible. just change the "gentleman" to a "Dr." and you will understand everything. If a doctor is supervising 5 M.Phil students and 5 PhD students. They all are working parallel. The paper of the student includes the name of his supervisor whenever he is working under his supervision. Then . I know a person at QAU Islamabad who has 100 papers in a year. and its ethical.

With Regards
Imran Mehmood Kanjoo

From: Mahmood Nagrial <M.NAGRIAL@UWS.EDU.AU>
To: "pakgrid@yahoogroups.com" <pakgrid@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2013 6:05 PM
Subject: RE: [pakgrid] Re: Productive Scientists

The best method to count the number of papers as weighted average (divided by number of authors eg. 4 authors in a paper should count as 0.25).
82 papers/year is not possible unless the whole section/division researchers are putting their boss name on all papers either with his knowledge or without asking him.
If that is the case, it is rather unethical.

Mahmood

________________________________________
From: pakgrid@yahoogroups.com [pakgrid@yahoogroups.com] on behalf of Zamir Awan [awanzamir@yahoo.com]
Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2013 8:22 PM
To: pakgrid@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [pakgrid] Re: Productive Scientists

Valid Point !

--- On Tue, 5/21/13, Dr Ashiq Anjum <ashiq.anjum@cern.ch> wrote:

From: Dr Ashiq Anjum <ashiq.anjum@cern.ch>

Subject: [pakgrid] Re: Productive Scientists
To: pakgrid@yahoogroups.com
Date: Tuesday, May 21, 2013, 9:54 PM

One gentleman produced 82 papers in 2011. This averages up to two papers in one week or roughly one paper in 3 days.

This includes the time to research a topic, do experimentation, get results, write up the findings, proof reading, quality assurance, discuss the results with colleagues, formatting...

How is this possible to do all these things in 3 days and then repeat the whole process 82 times in one year?

I believe quality has been ignored altogether while producing the list.

Best regards
Ashiq Anjum

--- In pakgrid@yahoogroups.com</mc/compose?to=pakgrid%40yahoogroups.com>, "Dr. Arshad Ali" <arshad.ali@...> wrote:
>
> Dear All,
>
> Kindly find the web-link for List of Eligible Applicant for Research
> Productivity Allowance (RPA) for 2012.
>
> *
> http://www.pcst.org.pk/docs/LIST%20OF%20ELIGIBLE%20APPLICANTS%20FOR%20RPA%202012%20final.pdf
> *
> *
> *
> This can be accessed from PCST website: www.pcst.gov.pk
>
> It is interesting to see that none of the engineer falls in the research
> productivity list. Does that mean engineers are not contributing to the
> society or there is something wrong in the way we look at our research
> output.
>
> Best regards
>
> --
> Dr Arshad Ali, Prof & Principal
> NUST School of EE&CS
> Islamabad, Pakistan
>

------------------------------------

Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pakgrid/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pakgrid/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
pakgrid-digest@yahoogroups.com
pakgrid-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
pakgrid-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/