PhD – S3lab

Security Research (VIII) – Papers, Language

Igor Santos — Wed, 12 Apr 2017 08:16:38 +0000

We return to one of the foundations of scientific life: writing contributions or papers. Previously, we had talked about the structure that interested us in Computer and Security of the particular system: (i) summary, (ii) introduction, (iii) [background], (iv) method, (v) evaluation, vi) Discussion , (Vii) related work, and (viii) conclusions. In this case we are going to give a few brushstrokes about how it should be the language used and how to make our contribution that supposes substantial, be recognized as such, in a way that also facilitates its compression and all entertaining to read.

The post Security Research (VIII) – Papers, Language appeared first on S3lab.

Security Research (VII) – The reject

Igor Santos — Sun, 12 Feb 2017 14:55:35 +0000

Well yes, we have already done a job that we believe has the level (and probably it has) and we receive an email with the fateful phrase “We regret to inform you” … Accompanied by the comments of the reviewers. In some…

Security Research (VI) – Papers, Structure

Igor Santos — Sat, 15 Oct 2016 11:38:15 +0000

After talking about how to choose a topic and director, how to do the first work plan and how a scientific contribution it is done, in addition to listing four typical mistakes in this post we will discuss one of the most important aspects: how to write. The structure of a classic experimental article (usually common in our area) follows a structure called IMRAD (Introduction, Materials and Methods, Results, and Discussion). While this structure is not followed to the letter in System Security (although it is common to do so in other disciplines), the structure is similar and often contain – more flexibly – the following points:

The post Security Research (VI) – Papers, Structure appeared first on S3lab.

Security Research (V) – 4 errors, 1 failure

Igor Santos — Sun, 24 Jul 2016 15:09:13 +0000

In this series of posts on how to start researching in system security, we have seen the first steps on how to choose topic, director, as well ad doing the first workplan and how a scientific contribution is done in this area. At this point, let us pause on how to move forward in our research to list common mistakes that often in these early stages, so that we can avoid them. Some of these have already been suggested in previous installments and many obvious, but it is worth remembering.

The post Security Research (V) – 4 errors, 1 failure appeared first on S3lab.

Security Research (IV) – Contributions

Igor Santos — Thu, 16 Jun 2016 13:03:14 +0000

In our previous posts of our series “Security Research” we saw how to make one of the first and most important step that both doctoral student and thesis director must carry out: the definition of the first general workplan. At this…

Security Research (III) – General workplan

Igor Santos — Tue, 19 Apr 2016 09:57:09 +0000

In previous posts of this series “Security research” have covered the selection of a theme and a director to be able to carry the doctoral thesis. This time we approach one of the most crucial aspects of the dissertation: the definition of the first workplan. We say “first” because this work plan will not be definitive and it will be updated as progress we (and others) on our chosen topic.

The post Security Research (III) – General workplan appeared first on S3lab.