I am studying how women professionals in India are adopting and using Artificial Intelligence (AI) technologies in their work.

If you are a female employee currently working in India and use AI tools such as ChatGPT, Gemini, Copilot, or other AI-enabled workplace technologies, I would be grateful if you could spare 8–10 minutes to complete my survey.

🔗 https://forms.gle/LfR8wnirGYPaoyjYA

Your responses will remain anonymous and will be used solely for academic research.

Please feel free to share this post with other eligible women professionals. Every response contributes significantly to the success of this research.

Day 1: Submission

Bhaskar Pandey submits a paper to a top journal.

Feels like a genius.

Goes to sleep peacefully for the first time in six months.

This is the last peaceful sleep for a long time.

Day 3: Checks email 47 times.

Nothing.

Checks again.

Still nothing.

Refreshes Gmail.

Gmail has not changed in the last four minutes.

Bhaskar does not trust Gmail.

Day 45: An email arrives.

“Your manuscript is under review.”

Bhaskar celebrates.

Tells his labmate.

Labmate says, “Bhai, yeh toh automatic email hai.”

Bhaskar does not tell his labmate that this ruined his entire evening.

Day 127 : Another email arrives.

“Decision on your manuscript.”

Bhaskar’s hands are shaking.

Opens the email slowly.

“We regret to inform you…”

The word “regret” does the damage.

Everything after “regret” is just noise.

The Reviews

Reviewer 1:

“This is an excellent and well-written paper. The methodology is sound and the results are impressive. I recommend minor revisions.”

Bhaskar smiles.

Reviewer 1 is a good human being.

Reviewer 1 understands research.

Bhaskar would like to meet Reviewer 1 and have chai with him.

Reviewer 2:

“I have serious concerns about this manuscript.”

Of course you do.

“The authors claim novelty but this work is clearly inspired by Zhang et al. 2019.”

Bhaskar checks Zhang et al. 2019.

He has never seen this paper in his life.

He reads it.

It is about something completely different.

Reviewer 2 has not read either paper.

Reviewer 2 continues:

“The results in Figure 3 are suspicious.”

Figure 3 is a straight line.

It is supposed to be a straight line.

It is literally proof that the system is stable.

Bhaskar stares at Figure 3 for ten minutes.

Figure 3 stares back.

Neither of them understands what Reviewer 2 wants.

Reviewer 2 continues again:

“The authors should compare with state-of-the-art methods from 2024.”

The paper was submitted in 2024.

Reviewer 2 wants comparison with papers that do not exist yet.

Reviewer 2 exists outside of time.

Final comment from Reviewer 2:

“Overall this paper needs significant work before it can be considered for publication.”

Significant work.

Six months of research.

One patent.

Two hundred simulations.

Significant work.

Bhaskar Pandey closes the laptop.

Goes to the mess.

Eats dal-chawal silently.

Comes back.

Opens the laptop.

Starts writing the rebuttal.

The Rebuttal

What Bhaskar writes:

“We thank Reviewer 2 for their valuable and insightful comments. We have carefully considered each point and made significant revisions…”

What Bhaskar means:

“Reviewer 2 clearly did not read the paper. Figure 3 is supposed to be a straight line. Zhang et al. 2019 is about fish farming. We have no idea what you want from us.”

Guide reviews the rebuttal.

Guide: “Bhaskar, this line — ‘we respectfully disagree’ — change it.”

Bhaskar: “To what, sir?”

Guide: “To ‘we thank the reviewer for this excellent point.’”

Bhaskar: “But sir, they are wrong…”

Guide: “Everyone is wrong. Nobody cares. Just get it published.”

Three months later

Paper accepted.

Bhaskar checks who Reviewer 2 was.

He will never know.

Reviewer 2 is anonymous.

Reviewer 2 will always be anonymous.

Reviewer 2 is everywhere and nowhere.

Reviewer 2 is the darkness itself.

THE END

Dedicated to every Reviewer 2 who ever lived.

We know what you are.

“If you survived a paper rejection and still kept going you’re not alone.

I wrote about the real emotional side of PhD life.

Happy to share if interested.

Written by someone currently inside a PhD at IIT Kharagpur.”

Hi!

I'm doing research in field of Forensic Psychology about eyetracking investigation of jurors characteristics and witness use of facility dog on jury decision making. If you are living in UK and 18+ I kindly request to fill it for me by clicking on questionnaire link attached below. It will be a huge contribution towards research.

https://unioflincoln.questionpro.eu/t/AB3uyS3ZB3wez0

Hey everyone,

Like a lot of you, I realized I was spending 20% of my time actually doing research and 80% of my time fighting with LaTeX errors, managing .bib files, tracking down lost citations, and trying to format my drafts.

Over time, I started building workflows to automate and streamline every single phase of the process. It eventually turned into a massive personal library of 40+ specific skills, scripts, and workflows covering the entire research paper lifecycle.

I just made the whole GitHub repository public so anyone can use it.

Here is the repo: https://github.com/ShaishavMaisuria/research-paper-lifecycle-skills

It covers 40+ areas, but the main highlights include:

• The Setup: Clean, pre-configured directory structures so you never have to set up a refs.bib, figure folder, or main .tex file from scratch again.
• The Execution: Automation scripts and workflows for literature reviews, gathering citation metadata, and structuring your drafts.
• The Formatting (No more LaTeX crashes): GitHub Actions that automatically compile your files into a clean PDF every single time you push a commit.

I built this to solve my own headaches, but figured there are probably a lot of people stuck inside writing papers this weekend who could use a cheat code.

It is completely free and open-source. Feel free to use it for your next paper, fork it, or modify it for your specific field. If you think I missed a skill or have ideas for what I should add next, let me know in the comments or drop an issue in the repo!

Back to writing.
Thanks