I am doing my PhD in data mining and I want to start writing my thesis. Is there any acceptable percentage of similarities between the final thesis and the used published research to create the final thesis? For example, one of my research papers is published by IEEE as full research paper and at the same time I extended that paper and got published with a journal. Now, I plan to include them in my thesis and I almost ran out of phrases and words to describe the work without having duplication from the two works.
I am a final year PhD in UK in a scientific discipline and I am writing my thesis. I have already published 2 journal papers and I have submitted 2 more papers for publications. My department does not allow a "publications-based" thesis so I need to write a thesis in the context of a book etc.   As I write my thesis in a couple of places, especially in the literature review, I tend to reuse sentences from my publications. I try to restate them a bit, maybe change some words for their synonyms etc. but it is practically me writing about what I wrote before. It goes without saying that I cite/quote me at the end of a passage if I say something non-obvious (I found that slightly funny. :) ). The problem is that occasionally I am just explaining for instance how a certain estimation technique works; in that case I cite the original authors and not myself. The syntax in those occasions though is practically the same as the original passage I used in my publication; as I have explained it once and was consider good, I find no reason to reinvent myself (I do a mild rewording as I mentioned but that is quite insignificant). Same things goes for listings. I do cite my paper in the beginning of a big list as the list's source but the list itself is almost identical as the one in "my" paper; in those cases I don't use quotations, just attribution "[]".  Is there an obvious guideline? The basic definition of plagiarism "reproducing the work of another person's as your own" is not (directly) applicable to me because I am the other person (almost *); if I am using other people's work I do cite them but I don't cite myself, citing them, in quotation marks!  I am a bit "fuzzy" about how not to plagiarize myself in my thesis (I have had no problem regarding my journal publications).  (* In all publications mentioned I am the first -but not sole- author.)
Are "beginner questions" allowed on Stack Overflow? I noticed that  (about basic  syntax) received a lot of downvotes as soon as I posted it. Is there any specific policy against the posting of questions with "obvious" answers on Stack Overflow?  I'm unclear as to why questions with "obvious" answers aren't usually well-received by the community - are beginner questions considered harmful for some reason? ("Obvious" is a relative term, of course - this type of question would be helpful to anyone who was learning C# for the first time, but it wouldn't be helpful to an experienced C# developer.) Sole survivor of attack on mining vessel, abandoned by his employer, has ability to teleport There's a story my grandpa use to tell me when I was younger, about the sole survivor of of an attack on a mining vessel in space. The man lives in space for months/years, ignored by the company he worked for and never rescued. Then when he thinks he is being rescued, it's actually another set of raiders who attack him and kidnap him.  He then wakes up in captivity in some sort of prison inside of an asteroid, and has a word tattooed on his forehead. My grandpa called him Ronin (that's what the tattoo on his forehead said) but I don't know what the character's real name is. Anyways, he learns that he has the ability to teleport after having a brush with death and decides to make his way back to Earth so that he can exact revenge on the mining company who abandoned him and left him floating to die.  Does anyone know what this story or book may be? My grandpa told it to me when I was little, he said that he got it from a book he use to love reading when he was younger. I'm assuming the book is very old (possibly pre 1940's as he was born in the 20s). I can't ask him as he is no longer alive. I'm also unsure as to whether or not all the details in the story he told me, are the same as in the original. "FTL" Communication with Quantum Entanglement? Can quantum entanglement make sending a message, whether audio, video, or even Morse code, instantaneous between two points (faster than it could travel normally at the speed of light)?  Let me first be clear, my question is not whether a message can travel faster than light. I simply mean whether a message can be generated here and then a copy of that message heard over there sooner than the message would normally be received.  Say a large number of entangled pairs are generated. One half the particles are given to Jack and the opposite ones to Sally. Jack then hops on a ship and travels 8 months to Mars. Sally then manipulates her particles in the form of a message. Do the corresponding opposite particles get manipulated simultaneously so that Jack receives the message instantly instead of the 16 light-minutes for a classically transmitted message? How to read the content of a file to a string in C? Formatting the union of sets In the example  $\cup^{i=1}_{\infty}F_i$   How do you get the i=1 directly below the union symbol and the infinity directly above? Repeating something with (1/n)th chance of success n times Is there anything that can be said about how many attempts it will take to correctly guess a random number out of 1000 numbers? If the number wouldn't change the probability would just increase every guess, giving in the end a probability of 1.  If the number changes every guess tough, you just have a 1/1000th chance everytime. Can it be calculated how many attempts it would probably take, on average?  (I'm sorry, i'm not very skilled in probability maths) Is the Hogwarts Express in the magical or non-magical realm? This question is related to  and explores an apparent inconsistency, given only the Harry Potter movies as source material.  The Hogwarts Express line seems to have an inconsistent existence between magical (invisible to ordinary humans aka muggles) and non-magical (muggle) realms; platform 9-3/4 is clearly hidden from muggles, but in Chamber of Secrets, when Harry and Ron take the car (in the muggle world) to catch up to the train, they make no explicit crossing into a magical realm, suggesting that the train is traveling the muggle world despite its departure from a magical platform.  In which realm (magical or muggle) does the Hogwarts Express exist? How is this apparent inconsistency resolved? This is not a duplicate question because I am looking for an explanation directed to a general audience as to the mistakes (if any) in  (reproduced below). (Numberphile is a YouTube channel devoted to pop-math and this particular video has garnered over 3m views.)   By general audience, I mean the same sort of audience as the millions who watch Numberphile. (Which would mean, ideally, making little or no mention of things that a general audience will never have heard of - e.g. Riemann zeta functions, analytic continuations, Casimir forces; and avoiding tactics like appealing to the fact that physicists and other clever people use it in string theory, so therefore it must be correct.)  Numberphile's Proof.  The proof proceeds by evaluating each of the following:  $S_1 = 1 - 1 + 1 - 1 + 1 - 1 + \ldots$   $S_2 = 1 - 2 + 3 - 4 + \ldots $   $S = 1 + 2 + 3 + 4 + \ldots $   "Now the first one is really easy to evaluate ... You stop this at any point. If you stop it at an odd point, you're going to get the answer $1$. If you stop it at an even point, you get the answer $0$. Clearly, that's obvious, right? ... So what number are we going to attach to this infinite sum? Do we stop at an odd or an even point? We don't know, so we take the average of the two. So the answer's a half."   Next:  $S_2 \ \ = 1 - 2 + 3 - 4 + \cdots$  $S_2 \ \ = \ \ \ \ \ \ \ 1 - 2 + 3 - 4 + \cdots$  Adding the above two lines, we get:  $2S_2 = 1 - 1 + 1 - 1 + \cdots$  Therefore, $2S_2=S_1=\frac{1}{2}$ and so $S_2=\frac{1}{4}$.  Finally, take  \begin{align} S - S_2 &amp; = 1 + 2 + 3 + 4 + \cdots           \\ &amp; - (1 - 2 + 3 - 4 + \cdots)          \\ &amp; =   0 + 4 + 0 + 8 + \cdots           \\ &amp; = 4 + 8 + 12 + \cdots           \\ &amp; = 4S \end{align}  Hence $-S_2=3S$ or $-\frac{1}{4}=3S$.  And so $S=-\frac{1}{12}$. $\blacksquare$ MathJax half-broken in suggested edit diffs In a suggested edit I just reviewed, about a third of the MathJax renders properly, but the rest doesn't. Note that the delimiters on puzzling are \$, so that doesn't escape it.    Related:  Don't render MathJax when viewing source:   Render MathJax when viewing rendered output: I have written a C++ program and complied it to produce a.out file. However, whenever I try to run it, I get Permission Denied. I read that we can use sudo, but I can't quite get it to work. I use something like, sudo "./a.out" but that too doesn't work.  Edit:  Here is the message I get when I try "./a.out".  bash: ./a.out: Permission denied How long can a flag remain active? I have flagged the following question as a duplicate.    Now I want to know: after how long time will it be stated as active?  I do not have problem with anything here. I just want to know after how long time the request (of a duplicate question) will automatically be rejected or approved.  OK, I got the things, so it will remain active until moderators will have a look at it...  But don't you think we should have a limit that after a certain number of days this kind of request will be dropped (or cancelled)? What are the best practices for battery longevity? How do you maximize the cycle count of your battery?  There seems to be a debate between:   Leave plugged in 24/7 but do a full cycle once a month Charge to ~100%, drain to ~10%, repeat.   NOTE: Taking your   Which method is better and why? How much of a difference does it really make?  Here are some of the better sources I've found about battery behavior so far. Even still I feel they don't conclusively answer the question above. See my elaborations below:           Elaborating on Option 1  Now IF Apple engineers were smart and optimized for AC draw when plugged in to not use up your charge cycles, then it seem logical to assume that you are using effectively none of your 1000 charge cycles while plugged in. If that's the case, it would seem that the LiPo drop from holding at 100% would be vastly outweighed by the fact you're not using any charge cycles.  However, this is a purely speculative assumption and I could find no evidence to either confirm or deny.  If this is NOT true, and the AC adapter only goes to charging the battery, then there would be no difference. Your battery would drain to 99%, then back up to 100%, then back down to 99%, etc. Those micro-charge cycles would add up at the same rate as 100% -> 0% -> 100%, and you would get no gain. In this case the negative effect of holding LiPo batteries at 100% would outweigh everything else.  Elaborating on Option 2  There are lots of good reasons why Option 2 is the way it is:   Because of known LiPo chemistry issues, holding a 100% charge for a long time causes the battery to degrade Apple specifically recommends not to leave it plugged in all the time  Draining a battery all the way to zero all the time is bad for the cell (Which is why ~10% is used) Heat is a killer, and when plugged in AND charging, you get extra heat that causes damage.   There are a couple reasons why I'm challenging Option 2:   It seems silly that the most intuitive use case for thousands of people that use their macs as primary computers is wrong. If the hypothesis in option 1 is true, you're just burning unnecessarily through your finite charge cycles. It's a pain to have to remember to keep plugging in and plugging out and be worried about whether or not your device is plugged in. What editors/IDEs are available for easing the process of writing TeX/LaTeX documents? Please state some useful features like code completion, spell checking, building final DVI or PDF files, etc.  This question is undergoing a systematic refurbishment, see  on Meta. If you’d like to see another editor feature covered here or to take care of an editor that’s not covered yet, share your ideas in that meta question.  List of editors Links to answers. Compute $P(X_1+\cdots+X_k\lt 1)$ for $(X_i)$ i.i.d. uniform on $(0,1)$ Consider $N=\min\{n: S_n&gt;1\}$, where $S_n=X_1+\cdots+X_n$ and $(X_i)_{i=1}^\infty$ is i.i.d. uniform on $(0,1)$. So, $N$ is the first time that $(S_n)_{n=1}^\infty$ crosses $1$. I'd like to calculate $E(N)$. To this end I'd like to calculate $\Pr(N\gt k)=\Pr(S_k\lt 1)$.  Is there a way to actually do this for any arbitrary $k$? I mean, certainly there is as I know about the distribution of $S_n$ but the formula is just formidable when you move with $k$ toward $\infty$ and even though tractable with a computer, I don't think it's tractable without it.  Is there maybe a better way to calculate the expectation? Thanks for any help. Minimum requirements of Ubuntu 20.10 Does anyone know what are the minimum requirements to install Ubuntu 20.10? PUA.Phishing.Bank Found Why doesn't the mirror modifier work with object groups? Why doesn't the mirror modifier work with object groups? I have a group made of four objects to which I want to apply a mirror modifier. For me, it's not working. What are the steps to make apply a mirror modifier to a group of objects? How can I check the available version of a package in the repositories? How can I check the version of the available package in the Ubuntu repositories without installing it? Let f : A → B and g : B → C be bijections. Prove that g◦f : A → C is a bijection  Can someone show me the steps I should take to solve this problem? Here is the proof I tried to weave while trying to prove this theorem:     Theorem. Every infinite subset of a countable set is countable.      Proof. Let $A$ be a countable set and $E\subset A$ be infinite. Then $A\thicksim\mathbb{N}$. This implies that there is a sequence $\left\{x_{n}\right\}_{n\in\mathbb{N}}$ where $x_{n}\in A$. Construct a sequence $\left\{n_{k}\right\}_{k\in\mathbb{N}}$ where $x_{n_{k}}\in A$, $n_{1}$ is the smallest positive integer such that $x_{n_{1}}\in A$, and $n_{k+1}&gt;n_{k}$. Then      $$ E=\bigcup_{k=1}^{\infty}x_{n_{k}}, $$      and $E$ is countable, because $E\thicksim\mathbb{N}$. $\blacksquare$   Is it convincing?