Tim Sullivan | Thesis

My own snowflake methodic in articles most often looks something like this:
Chapter 1. The urgency of the problem. Review of available methods. Advantages and disadvantages. Prospects. Chapter 2. Theoretical part of the proposed by me. Methods. Algorithms. Comparison and niche. Chapter 3. The practical part of what I proposed. Architecture. Research productivity. Comparison with competitors. Chapter 4. Practical application. The problem is the problem, the solution, the results.
The advice of experience essay writer in our service is do not postpone the writing of articles at the last minute. Now at least 10 publications are required for the candidate’s candidature, two or three of them (for different specialties in different ways) should be on the VAK list (detailed requirements here.) If there is a ready-made, more or less complete piece – describe and publish it. If you want to finalize – write in the article about the plans for improvement. And how do you finish – another article. Of course, every sneeze should not be described, but polished to a mirror shine – it’s pointless.  Participation in conferences, as well as the study of other abstracts, or simply attend the pre-defense / meeting of the department is also useful – the more other people’s examples in front of your eyes, the clearer the requirements and expectations become. If the thesis topic changes – keep the old versions in drafts. Any comments that you give during the course of work, save, as well as the answers to them. Besides the fact that this is just a useful source of your own ideas, it will be very useful to you at the last stage – preparing additional materials. People are not able to formulate what exactly they have done innovative (and sometimes they do not think about it in the process of writing – because in the diploma, for example, it is rarely required). But the Ph.D. thesis is about 10 diplomas in complexity. For each point of scientific novelty, I recommend the wording-triad: a “defended idea” is proposed, differing “the specificity of the proposed approach”, which allows “pragmatic benefit”.