l********8
发帖数: 18 | 1 CNS一作在学术界被广泛认可，可是有朋友提交EB1a，找诺贝尔获奖者些推荐些EB1a被
拒。我发了CELL一作，但没什么其他好文章。移民官知道CNS一作的意义吗？12月初提
交EB1a 140 到NSC 还没消息呢。 |
x****2
发帖数: 421 | 2 你可以吹，他们不一定信。
就算“移民官知道CNS一作的意义”，也没啥意义，因为不算contribution。要是你有
1000的citation，PLOS One 也能吹成CNS。。。。 |
k****r
发帖数: 456 | 3 别指望一帮高中生能知道你觉得牛比的杂志
得告诉他们 |
l***i
发帖数: 42 | 4 我明确知道有nature一作被RFE然后被拒了的 |
l********8
发帖数: 18 | 5 谢谢大家。我觉得发了CNS就是在领域里有major contribution，可是得会包装自己，
否则移民官不认可。有的领域小众，即使是CNS，citation也不高。 |
t******e
发帖数: 1363 | |
x****2
发帖数: 421 | 7 呃。。。如果你在NSC的话，这个要小心。
曾经的RFE里面明确有过，发顶级文章，只代表你的工作足够原创，并被大家认为
interesting，并不代表major contribution to the field as a whole。
祝好运
【在 l********8 的大作中提到】
: 谢谢大家。我觉得发了CNS就是在领域里有major contribution，可是得会包装自己，
: 否则移民官不认可。有的领域小众，即使是CNS，citation也不高。
|
l********8
发帖数: 18 | 8 @NSC.最近蛮紧张的，怎么才算是major contribution to the field as a whole？ 真
的好难哦。
看到trackkit上有人说的major contribution觉得很有用。分享给大家。
In most cases, how your work was used is more important than who used your
work. USCIS is likely to value citations from other experts in the field who
have:
• Implemented your work in their own research by directly adopting
your methods, techniques, processes, or models;
• Compared your work to their own or that of others in a way that
reveals that yours is superior in some way;
• Utilized your work to develop an improved technology, treatment, or
method in the field; or
• Verified the results of your work by successfully applying it to
their own research topic.
Other significant citations can come in the form of patents, government or
technical reports, clinical trials, field guidelines or recommendations, or
any other similar implementation of your work. USCIS may also place greater
weight on citations from government institutions and industry, particularly
if researchers at those institutions have significantly implemented and
benefited from your work in some way.
【在 x****2 的大作中提到】
: 呃。。。如果你在NSC的话，这个要小心。
: 曾经的RFE里面明确有过，发顶级文章，只代表你的工作足够原创，并被大家认为
: interesting，并不代表major contribution to the field as a whole。
: 祝好运
|
l********8
发帖数: 18 | 9
so what is major contribution to the field as a whole?
Trackkit 上有人的分析觉得很有用，分享给大家。
In most cases, how your work was used is more important than who used your
work. USCIS is likely to value citations from other experts in the field who
have:
• Implemented your work in their own research by directly adopting
your methods, techniques, processes, or models;
• Compared your work to their own or that of others in a way that
reveals that yours is superior in some way;
• Utilized your work to develop an improved technology, treatment, or
method in the field; or
• Verified the results of your work by successfully applying it to
their own research topic.
Other significant citations can come in the form of patents, government or
technical reports, clinical trials, field guidelines or recommendations, or
any other similar implementation of your work. USCIS may also place greater
weight on citations from government institutions and industry, particularly
if researchers at those institutions have significantly implemented and
benefited from your work in some way.
【在 x****2 的大作中提到】
: 呃。。。如果你在NSC的话，这个要小心。
: 曾经的RFE里面明确有过，发顶级文章，只代表你的工作足够原创，并被大家认为
: interesting，并不代表major contribution to the field as a whole。
: 祝好运
|
L**i
发帖数: 22365 | 10 可以吹，没引用的话吹了用处也不是特别大
重点是impact |
l********8
发帖数: 18 | 11 我这个Cell有121个引用了；大约110个独立引用，我的文章总引用139. case不是很强
，就没加急。等了九个半月了。 |
n********y
发帖数: 8 | 12 thanks for sharing, and good luck!
who
or
【在 l********8 的大作中提到】
: 我这个Cell有121个引用了；大约110个独立引用，我的文章总引用139. case不是很强
: ，就没加急。等了九个半月了。
|
