1 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY & IPR

MODULE 1
Introduction: Meaning of Research, Objectives of Engineering Research, and Motivation in Engineering Research, Types of
Engineering Research, Finding and Solving a Worthwhile Problem. Ethics in Engineering Research, Ethics in Engineering
Research Practice, Types of Research Misconduct, Ethical Issues Related to Authorship.

MODULE 2
Literature Review and Technical Reading, New and Existing Knowledge, Analysis and Synthesis of Prior Art Bibliographic
Databases, Web of Science, Google and Google Scholar, Effective Search: The Way Forward Introduction to Technical
Reading Conceptualizing Research, Critical and Creative Reading, Taking Notes While Reading, Reading Mathematics and
Algorithms, Reading a Datasheet.
Attributions and Citations: Giving Credit Wherever Due, Citations: Functions and Attributes, Impact of Title and Keywords
on Citations, Knowledge Flow through Citation, Citing Datasets, Styles for Citations, Acknowledgments and Attributions,
What Should Be Acknowledged, Acknowledgments in, Books Dissertations, Dedication or Acknowledgments.

MODULE 3
Introduction To Intellectual Property: Role of IP in the Economic and Cultural Development of the Society, IP Governance,
IP as a Global Indicator of Innovation, Origin of IP History of IP in India. Major Amendments in IP Laws and Acts in India.
Patents: Conditions for Obtaining a Patent Protection, To Patent or Not to Patent an Invention. Rights Associated with
Patents. Enforcement of Patent Rights. Inventions Eligible for Patenting. Non-Patentable Matters. Patent Infringements.
Avoid Public Disclosure of an Invention before Patenting. Process of Patenting. Prior Art Search. Choice of Application to
be Filed. Patent Application Forms. Jurisdiction of Filing Patent Application. Publication. Pre-grant Opposition. Examination.
Grant of a Patent. Validity of Patent Protection. Post-grant Opposition. Commercialization of a Patent. Need for a Patent
Attorney/Agent. Can a Worldwide Patent be Obtained. Do I Need First to File a Patent in India. Patent Related Forms. Fee
Structure. Types of Patent Applications. Commonly Used Terms in Patenting. National Bodies Dealing with Patent Affairs.
Utility Models.

MODULE 4
Copyrights and Related Rights: Classes of Copyrights. Criteria for Copyright. Ownership of Copyright. Copyrights of the
Author. Copyright Infringements. Copyright Infringement is a Criminal Offence. Copyright Infringement is a Cognizable
Offence. Fair Use Doctrine. Copyrights and Internet. Non-Copyright Work. Copyright Registration. Judicial Powers of the
Registrar of Copyrights. Fee Structure. Copyright Symbol. Validity of Copyright. Copyright Profile of India. Copyright and the
word ‘Publish’. Transfer of Copyrights to a Publisher. Copyrights and the Word ‘Adaptation’. Copyrights and the Word
‘Indian Work’. Joint Authorship. Copyright Society. Copyright Board. Copyright Enforcement Advisory Council (CEAC).
International Copyright Agreements, Conventions and Treaties. Interesting Copyrights Cases.
Trademarks: Eligibility Criteria. Who Can Apply for a Trademark. Acts and Laws. Designation of Trademark Symbols.
Classification of Trademarks. Registration of a Trademark is Not Compulsory. Validity of Trademark. Types of Trademarks
Registered in India. Trademark Registry. Process for Trademarks Registration. Prior Art Search. Famous Case Law: Coca-
Cola Company vs. Bisleri International Pvt. Ltd.

MODULE 5
Industrial Designs: Eligibility Criteria. Acts and Laws to Govern Industrial Designs. Design Rights. Enforcement of Design Rights.
Non-Protectable Industrial Designs India. Protection Term. Procedure for Registration of Industrial Designs. Prior Art
Search. Application for Registration. Duration of the Registration of a Design. Importance of Design Registration.
Cancellation of the Registered Design. Application Forms. Classification of Industrial Designs. Designs Registration Trend
in India. International Treaties. Famous Case Law: Apple Inc. vs. Samsung Electronics Co.
Geographical Indications: Acts, Laws and Rules Pertaining to GI. Ownership of GI. Rights Granted to the Holders. Registered
GI in India. Identification of Registered GI. Classes of GI. Non-Registerable GI. Protection of GI. Collective or Certification
Marks. Enforcement of GI Rights. Procedure for GI Registration Documents Required for GI Registration. GI Ecosystem in
India.

Case Studies on Patents. Case study of Curcuma (Turmeric) Patent, Case study of Neem Patent, Case study of Basmati patent.
IP Organizations in India. Schemes and Programmes

References / E-Resources:
1. Dipankar Deb, Rajeeb Dey, Valentina E. Balas “Engineering Research Methodology”, ISSN 1868- 4394 ISSN 1868-
4408 (electronic), Intelligent Systems Reference Library, ISBN 978-981-13- 2946-3 ISBN 978-981-13-2947-0 (eBook),
[Link] 2.
2. Intellectual Property A Primer for Academia by Prof. Rupinder Tewari Ms. Mamta Bhardwaj
3. E-resources – online learning material
2 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY & IPR

MODULE 1
Meaning of Research:
Research refers to a careful, well-defined (or redefined), objective, and systematic method of search for
knowledge, or formulation of a theory that is driven by inquisitiveness for the unknown and useful on a
particular aspect to make an original contribution to expand the existing knowledge base. Research involves
formulation of hypothesis or proposition of solutions, data analysis, and deductions; and ascertaining whether the
conclusions fit the hypothesis. Research is a process of creating, or formulating knowledge that does not yet
exist.
As per Booth, research cycle starts with basically a practical problem: one must be clear what the
problem being attempted to solve is and why it is important. This problem motivates a research question without
which one can tend to get lost in a giant swamp of information. The question helps one zero in onto manageable
volume of information, and in turn defines a research project which is an activity or set of activities that ultimately
leads to result or answer, which in turn helps to solve the practical problem that one started with in the first place
as shown in the figure below.

Figure: The research flow diagram

The building up of background for doing research includes one to acquire the ability to connect
different areas. The purpose is to prepare the mind for active work as opposed to becoming a repository or an
encyclopaedia. Research is not just about reading a lot of books and finding a lot of, gathering a lot of existing
information. It is instead adding, maybe small and specific, yet original, contribution to that existing body of
knowledge. So, research is about how one poses a question which has relevance to the world that we are living
in, and while looking for that answer one must be as systematic as one can be. There must be a balance between
what is achievable in a research program with a finite endpoint and, the contribution it is going to make. The
objective of a good research program is to try and gain insight into something. Or indeed, to try and solve a
problem. Good research questions develop throughout the project actually and one can even keep modifying
them. Through research, one would like to make, or develop, new knowledge about the world around us which
can be written down or recorded in some way, and that knowledge can be accessed through that writing or
recording. The ways of developing and accessing knowledge come in three, somewhat overlapping, broad
categories.
Observation is the most fundamental way of obtaining information from a source, and it could be significant
if the thing that we are trying to observe is strange or exciting, or is difficult to observe. Observation takes
different forms from something like measurements in a laboratory to a survey among a group of subjects to the
time it takes for a firmware routine to run. The observational data often needs to be processed in some form and
this leads to the second category of knowledge, the model.
Models are approximated, often simplified ways of describing sometimes very complex interactions in
the form of a statistical relationship, a figure, or a set of mathematical equations. For instance, the modelling
equation captures the relationship between different attributes or the behaviour of the device in an abstract form
and enables us to understand the observed phenomena. The final category is a way of arranging or doing things
through processes, algorithms, procedures, arrangements, or reference designs, to get a certain desired result. The
categories of knowledge as enumerated above are shown in the below figure.
3 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY & IPR

Figure: The categories of knowledge in research

Good research involves systematic collection and analysis of information and is followed by an attempt
to infer a little bit beyond the already known information in a way that is a significant value addition. Usually,
engineering research is a journey that traverses from a research area (example: Control Systems), to the topic
(example: Control of Microbial Fuel Cells) and finally onto the problem (example: Adaptive Control of Single
Chamber Microbial Fuel Cells) (Area → Topic → Problem). Getting a good problem to solve is more than half
the work done. However, sometimes he journeys can be reverse, for example, the traversal from (Problem →
Topic → Area). This can happen when one is led to a problem through a connection to another problem whose
top structure is different.
Engineering research is the process of developing the perspectives and seeking improvements in knowledge
and skills to enable the recognition, planning, design, and execution of research in a wide range of forms relevant
for engineering and technology investigations and developments. We can start off by describing some problem
in the world that exists that is bugging or worrying us and that we should be addressing. It could be that there is
something we would like to do or accomplish but currently cannot because we lack the knowledge to do so. It
could be that there is something that already works, but we do not know why and we would like to understand it
better. It could be that we want to do something to see what will happen.
Objectives of Engineering Research
The objective of engineering research is to solve new and important problems, and since the conclusion
at the end of one’s research outcome must be new, but when one starts, the conclusion is unknown. So, the start
itself is tricky, one may say. The answer is, based on “circumstantial evidence”, intuition, and imagination, one
guesses what may be a possible conclusion. A guess gives a target to work toward, and after initial attempts, it
may turn out that the guess is incorrect. But the work may suggest new worthy avenues or targets which may be
based on some modifications of the initial target, or may need new techniques, or one may obtain negative results
which may render the initial target or some other targets as not realizable, or may lead to fortunate discoveries
while looking for something else (serendipity). Research objectives can sometimes be convoluted and difficult to
follow. Knowing where and how to find different types of information helps one solve engineering problems, in
both academic and professional career.
Lack of investigation into engineering guidelines, standards, and best practices result in failures with
severe repercussions. As an engineer, the ability to conduct thorough and accurate research while clearly
communicating the results is extremely important in decision-making. The main aim of the research is to apply
scientific approaches to seek answers to open questions, and although each research study is particularly suited
for a certain approach, in general, the following are different types of research studies: exploratory or formulative,
descriptive, diagnostic, and hypothesis-testing. The objectives of engineering research should be to develop new
theoretical or applied knowledge and not necessarily limited to obtaining abilities to obtain the desired result. The
objectives should be framed such that in the event of not being able to achieve the desired result that is being
sought, one can fall back to understanding why it is not possible, because that is also a contribution toward
ongoing research in solving that problem. Of course, someone else might come along and propose a different
approach where the desired objective is indeed possible to be achieved.
4 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY & IPR

Motivation in Engineering Research

The possible motives may be the result of one or more of the following desires:
(i) Studies have shown that intrinsic motivations like interest, challenge, learning, meaning, purpose,
are linked to strong creative performance
(ii) Extrinsic motivating factors like rewards for good work include money, fame, awards, praise, and
status are very strong motivators, but may block creativity. For example: Research outcome may
enable obtaining a patent which is a good way to become rich and famous.
(iii) Influences from others like competition, collaboration, commitment, and encouragement are also
motivating factors in research. For example: my friends are all doing research and so should I, or,
a person that I dislike is doing well and I want to do better.
(iv) Personal motivation in solving unsolved problems, intellectual joy, service to community, and
respectability are all driving factors.
The following factors would be a mix of extrinsic and intrinsic aspects:

 Wanting to do better than what has been achieved in the world

 Improve the state of the art in technology
 Contribute to the improvement of society
 Fulfilment of the historical legacy in the immediate sociocultural context.
Several other factors like government directives, funding opportunities in certain areas, and terms of employment, can
motivate people to get involved in engineering research.
Types of Engineering Research
The different types of research are
(i) Descriptive versus Analytical: Descriptive research includes comparative and correlational
methods, and fact-finding inquiries, to effectively describe the present state of art. The researcher
holds no control over the variables; rather only reports as it is. Descriptive research also includes
attempts to determine causes even though the variables cannot be controlled. On the contrary, in
analytical research, already available facts for analysis and critical evaluation are utilized. Some
research studies can be both descriptive and analytical.

(ii) Applied versus Fundamental: Research can either be applied research or fundamental (basic or
pure) research. Applied research seeks to solve an immediate problem facing the organization,
whereas fundamental research is concerned with generalizations and formulation of a theory.
Research concerning natural phenomena or relating to pure mathematics are examples of
fundamental research. Research to identify social or economic trends, or those that find out whether
certain communications will be read and understood are examples of applied research. The primary
objective of applied research is to determine a solution for compelling problems in actual practice,
while basic research is aimed at seeking information which could have a broad base of applications
in the medium to long term
(iii) Quantitative versus Qualitative: Quantitative research uses statistical observations of a sufficiently
large number of representative cases to draw any conclusions, while qualitative researchers rely on a
few nonrepresentative cases or verbal narrative in behavioural studies such as clustering effect in
intersections in Transportation engineering to make a proposition.
Finding and Solving a Worthwhile Problem
A researcher may start out with the research problems stated by the Supervisor or posed by others that
are yet to be solved. Alternately, it may involve rethinking of a basic theory, or need to be formulated or put
together from the information provided in a group of papers suggested by the Supervisor. Research scholars are
faced with the task of finding an appropriate problem on which to begin their research. Skills needed to
accomplish such a task at the outset, while taking care of possible implications are critically important but often
not taught. Once the problem is vaguely identified, the process of literature survey and technical reading would
take place for more certainty of the worthiness of the intended problem. However, an initial spark is ideally required
before the process of literature survey may duly begin. Sometimes, an oral presentation by somebody which is
followed by asking questions or introspection provides this perspective which reading papers do not. At other
times, a development in another subject may have produced a tool or a result which has direct implications to
the researcher’s subject and may lead to problem identification.
5 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY & IPR

A worthwhile research problem would have one or more attributes. It could be

nonintuitive/counterintuitive even to someone who knows the area, something that the research community had
been expecting for some time, a major simplification of a central part of the theory, a new result which would
start off a new subject or an area, provides a new method or improves upon known methods of doing something
which has practical applications, or a result which stops further work in an area. The researcher has to be
convinced that the problem is worthwhile before beginning to tackle it because best efforts come when the work
is worth doing, and the problem and/or solution has a better chance of being accepted by the research
community.
Not all problems that one solves will be great, and sometimes major advancements are made through
solutions to small problems dealt with effectively. Some problems are universally considered hard and open, and
have deep implications and connections to different concepts. The reality is that most researchers in their
lifetime do not get into such problems. However, hard problems get solved only because people tackle them.
The question a researcher has to grapple with whether the time investment is worth it given that the likely
outcome is negative, and so it is a difficult personal decision to make. At the same time, even in the case of
failure to solve the intended hard problem, there may be partial/side results that serve the immediate need of
producing some results for the dissertation.
George Pólya (1887–1985) suggested a 4-step procedure for mathematical problem-solving which is
relevant to engineering researchers as well. Recent work such as suggest the relevance of these
recommendations. The recommended steps to solve a research problem are
(i) Understand the problem, restate it as if it’s your own, visualize the problem by drawing figures,
and determine if something more is needed.
(ii) One must start somewhere and systematically explore possible strategies to solve the problem or a
simpler version of it while looking for patterns.
(iii) Execute the plan to see if it works, and if it does not then start over with another approach. Having
delved into the problem and returned to it multiple times, one might have a flash of insight or a
new idea to solve the problem
(iv) Looking back and reflecting helps in understanding and assimilating the strategy, and is a sort of
investment into the future.
Ethics in Engineering Research
Ethics generally refers to a set of rules distinguishing acceptable and unacceptable conduct,
distinguishing right from wrong, or wise aphorisms like the sayings of Chanakya. Most people learn such norms
in their formative years but moral development continues through different stages of growth. Although everyone
recognizes some common ethical norms, but there is difference in interpretation and application. Ethical
principles can be used for evaluation, proposition, or interpretation of laws. Although ethics are not laws, but laws
often follow ethics because ethics are our shared values.
International norms for the ethical conduct of research have been there since the adoption of the
Nuremberg Code in 1947. According to Whitbeck, the issues related to research credit dates to the establishment
of the British Royal Society (BRS) in the seventeenth century to refine the methods and practices of modern
science. This event altered the timing and credit issues on the release of research results since BRS gave priority to
whoever first submitted findings for publication, rather than trying to find out who had first discovered.
Whitbeck raised two simple but significant questions to address the tricky issue of authorship in research:
1. Who should be included as an author and
2. The appropriate order of listing of authors.
In an increasingly interconnected world, the issue of coauthorship is very relevant to all researchers.
There are issues around individuals who may be deeply involved during the conduct of the research work, but
may not contribute in the drafting phase. Additionally, certain universities now put restrictions on coauthorship
to prevent malpractices.
Government bodies, and universities worldwide have adopted certain codes for research ethics.
Research ethics and the responsible conduct of research are often erroneously used interchangeably. Research
ethics examines the appropriate application of research outcomes, while responsible conduct of research deals
with the way the work is undertaken.
Ethics in Engineering Research Practice
Technological developments raise a whole range of ethical concerns such as privacy issues and data
related to surveillance systems, and so engineering researchers need to make ethical decisions and are
answerable for the repercussions borne out of their research as outcomes. The reason that ethics matter in data
used in engineering research is usually because there is impact on humans. Certain practices may be acceptable to
6 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY & IPR

certain people in certain

7 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY & IPR

situations, and the reasons for unacceptability may be perfectly valid. We have unprecedented access to data
today, and unprecedented options for analysis of these data and consequences in engineering research related to
such data. Are there things that are possible to do with this data, that we agree we should not do? Engineering
ethics gives us the rule book; tells us, how to decide what is okay to do and what is not. Engineering research is
not work in isolation to the technological development taking place. Researchers make many choices that matter
from an ethical perspective and influence the effects of technology in many ways:
(i) By setting the ethically right requirements at the very outset, engineering researchers can
ultimately influence the effects of the developed technology.
(ii) Influence may also be applied by researchers through design (a process that translates the
requirements into a blueprint to fulfil those requirements). During the design process, decision is to
be made about the priority in importance of the requirements taking ethical aspects into
consideration.
(iii) Thirdly, engineering researchers must choose between different alternatives fulfilling similar functions.
Research outcomes often have unintended and undesirable side effects. It is a vital ethical responsibility of
researchers to ensure that hazards/risks associated with the technologies that they develop, are minimized and
alternative safer mechanisms are considered. If possible, the designs should be made inherently safe such that
they avoid dangers, or come with safety factors, and multiple independent safety barriers, or if possible, a
supervisory mechanism to take control if the primary process fails.
Types of Research Misconduct
Engineering research should be conducted to improve the state-of-the-art of technologies. Research integrity
encompasses dealing fairly with others, honesty about the methods and results, replicating the results wherever
possible to avoid errors, protecting the welfare of research subjects, ensuring laboratory safety, and so forth. To
prevent mistakes, peer reviews should take place before the research output is published.
There may be different types of research misconduct as described in research articles, which can be summarized
as follows:
(i) Fabrication (Illegitimate creation of data): Fabrication is the act of conjuring data or
experiments with a belief of knowledge about what the conclusion of the analysis or experiments
would be, but cannot wait for the results possibly due to timeline pressures from supervisor or
customers.
(ii) Falsification (Inappropriate alteration of data): Falsification is the misrepresentation or
misinterpretation, or illegitimate alteration of data or experiments, even if partly, to support a
desired hypothesis even when the actual data received from experiments suggest otherwise.
Falsification and fabrication of data and results, hamper engineering research, cause false empirical
data to percolate in the literature, wreck trustworthiness of individuals involved, incur additional
costs, impede research progress, and cause actual and avoidable delays in technical advancement.
Misleading data can also crop up due to poor design of experiments or incorrect measurement
practices. The image of engineering researchers as objective truth seekers is often jeopardized by
the discovery of data related frauds. Such misconduct can be thwarted by researchers by always
trying to reproduce the results independently whenever they are interested to do further work in a
published material which is likely to be part of their literature survey.
(iii) Plagiarism (Taking other’s work sans attribution): Plagiarism takes place when someone uses
or reuses the work (including portions) of others (text, data, tables, figures, illustrations or concepts)
as if it were his/her own without explicit acknowledgement. Verbatim copying or reusing one’s
own published work is termed as self-plagiarism and is also an unacceptable practice in scientific
literature. The increasing availability of scientific content on the internet seems to encourage plagiarism
in certain cases, but also enables detection of such practices through automated software packages (Eg:
iTheticate: [Link]
How are supervisors, reviewers or editors alerted to plagiarism?

 Original author comes to know and informs everyone concerned.

 Sometimes a reviewer finds out about it during the review process.
 Or, readers who come across the article or book, while doing research.
Although there are many free tools and paid tools available that one can procure institutional license of,
one cannot conclusively identify plagiarism, but can only get a similarity score which is a metric that provides a
score of the amount of similarity between already published content and the unpublished content under scrutiny.
However, a low similarity score does not guarantee that the document is plagiarism free. It takes a human eye to
ascertain whether the content has been plagiarized or not. It is important to see the individual scores of the sources,
not just the overall similarity index. Setting a standard of a maximum allowable similarity index is inadequate usage of
8 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY & IPR

the tool. Patchwork

9 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY & IPR

plagiarism is more difficult to evaluate. There are simple and ethical ways to avoid a high similarity count on an
about to be submitted manuscript. Sometimes, certain published content is perfect for one’s research paper,
perhaps in making a connection or fortifying the argument presented. The published material is available for the
purpose of being used fairly. One is not expected to churn out research outcomes in thin air.
However, whatever is relevant can be reported by paraphrasing in one’s own words, that is, without
verbatim copy. One can also summarize the relevant content and naturally, the summary invariably would use one’s
own words. In all these cases, citing the original source is important. However, merely because one has cited a
source, it does not mean that one can copy sentences (or paragraphs) of the original content verbatim. A
researcher should practise writing in such a way that the reader can recognize the difference between the ideas or
results of the authors and those that are from other sources. Such a practice enables one to judge whether one is
disproportionately using or relying on content from existing literature.
(iv) Other Aspects of Research Misconduct: Serious deviations from accepted conduct could be
construed as research misconduct. When there is both deception and damage, a fraud is deemed to have
taken place. Sooner or later ethical violations get exposed. Simultaneous submission of the same article
to two different journals also violates publication policies. Another issue is that when mistakes are
found in an article or any published content, they are generally not reported for public access
unless a researcher is driven enough to build on that mistake and provide a correct version of the
same which is not always the primary objective of the researcher.
Ethical Issues Related to Authorship
Academic authorship involves communicating scholarly work, establishing priority for their discoveries,
and building peer-reputation, and comes with intrinsic burden of acceptance of the responsibility for the
contents of the work. It is the primary basis of evaluation for employment, promotion, and other honours. There are
several important research conduct and ethics related issues connected to authorship of research papers as
described by Newman and Jones and are summarized herewith in the context of engineering research.
Credit for research contributions is attributed in three major ways in research publications:

 By authorship (of the intended publication),

 Citation (of previously published or formally presented work), and
 Through a written acknowledgment (of some inputs to the present research).
Authorship establishes both accountability and gives due credit. A person is expected to be listed as an
author only when associated as a significant contributor in research design, data interpretation, or writing of the
paper. Including “guest” or “gift” (coauthorship bestowed on someone with little or no contribution to the work)
authors dilutes the contribution of those who did the work, inappropriately inflates credentials of the listed
authors, and is ethically a red flag highlighting research misconduct. Sometimes, the primary author dubiously
bestows coauthorship on a junior faculty or a student to boost their chances of employment or promotion, which
can be termed as Career- boost authorship. There is also an unfortunate malpractice of coauthorship that can be
described as “Career- preservation authorship” wherein a head of the department, a dean, a provost, or other
administrators are added as Coauthors because of quid pro quo arrangement wherein the principal author
benefits from a “good relation” with the superiors and the administrator benefits from authorship without doing
the required work for it.
Sometimes, an actual contributor abstains from the list of authors due to nondisclosed conflict of
interest within the organization. Such coauthorships can be termed as ghost coauthorship. Full disclosure of all those
involved in the research is important so that evaluation can happen both based on findings, and whether there
was influence from the conflicts. In another type of questionable authorship, some researchers list one another
as coauthors as a reciprocal gesture with no real collaboration except minimal reading and editing, without truly
reviewing the work threadbare. Some authors, in trying to acquire a sole-authored work, despite relying on
significant contribution to the research work from others, recognize that effort only by an acknowledgment,
thereby misrepresenting the contributions of the listed authors. The unrecognized “author” is consequently,
unavailable to readers for elaboration. All listed authors have the full obligation of all contents of a research
article, and so naturally, they should also be made aware of a journal submission by the corresponding author. It
is imperative that their consent is sought with respect to the content and that they be agreeable to the
submission. In case of misconduct like inappropriate authorship, while the perpetrator is easier to find, the
degree of appropriate accountability of the coauthors is not always obvious. Being able to quantify the
contributions to appropriately recognize and ascertain the degree of associated accountability of each coauthor,
is appealing. Double submission is an important ethical issue related to authorship, which involves submission
of a paper to two forums simultaneously. The motivation is to increase publication possibility and possibly
decrease time to publication. Reputed journals want to publish original papers, i.e., papers which have not appeared
elsewhere, and strongly discourage double submission.