Tuesday, January 20, 2009


The question of publishable results has come up this past week. The original project that my thesis topic is based on has two sets of data. One is good, the other is not great - in fact, it sucks. All is not lost - it can still be reduced and analyzed, and it'll still be used in my thesis (and thank God I have the good data set and two other projects that worked out).

I know that the crappy data isn't publishable - there are too many holes in the data acquisition and reduction process. However, I'm wondering if I can use the decent data set for a paper on its own. The problem is that this data set is much smaller than the other, and I'm just not sure if there is 1) enough to say about it and 2) a point to publish it besides just adding another paper to my name.

Any comments? How do you decide if something is publishable or not?