Instructions for pre-examiners (School of Electrical Engineering)
Evaluation process of the doctoral thesis and purpose of the pre-examination
The examination of the thesis starts with the pre-examination of the thesis: two independent pre-examiners will give their statements on the thesis. The purpose of the pre-examination is to establish whether the doctoral thesis manuscript fulfils the general quality requirements of Aalto University and whether the thesis is ready to be published. Based on these statements, the Doctoral Programme Committee will decide on granting permission for public defence either directly or after minor or major revisions, depending on the statements.
Once permission for public defence has been granted, the thesis will be published already before the public defence: .
Finally, the thesis will be examined at a public examination/defence by the opponent(s). After this, the Doctoral Programme Committee decides on the approval of the doctoral thesis.
Forms of doctoral theses in the School of Electrical Engineering
In the School of Electrical Engineering, an approved doctoral thesis may be a monograph or an article-based doctoral thesis. Please see details of the two forms here.
Examination of a monograph: Examining a monograph requires particular precision and carefulness, since the content is examined as something new, unlike in the case of an article-based thesis, where the articles have already undergone a scientific peer-review process.
Examination of an article-based doctoral thesis: The examination is directed on the summary part and the articles as whole. In an article-based doctoral thesis, the published articles have already undergone peer review. Most of the attention is thus directed on the unpublished parts (the summary and the publications that are still in the submitted state).
Pre-examination statement
The pre-examination time is 4 weeks, from the receipt of the official pre-examination request. Please deliver your statement and evaluation table (please see below) within this time, so that the process can be completed within the time set by the regulations. The statement is addressed to the Doctoral Programme Committee and is sent by e-mail to Planning Officer Emma Holmlund.
In your statement of 2-5 pages, you should give a summation of the most important results and merits of the doctoral thesis along with discovered shortcomings. Please also give your opinion on the originality and significance of the results for the field, the scientific correctness and clarity, the sufficiency of the candidate’s contribution to the research, and the English language. Necessary corrections and suggestions for improvement are mentioned in the statement. If you wish, typos or minor stylistic corrections may be included in the statement or in a separate document (electronic version of the manuscript), submitted at the same time with the pre-examination statement. Please notice that all communication related to the manuscript and its evaluation needs to go through the professor Vesa Välimäki or planning officer Emma Holmlund.
In your statement, please also give the following information:
- Name of the doctoral student
- Title of the doctoral thesis manuscript
- Your own name and title
- Your affiliation
- Date of the statement
In addition to the statement, you are asked to evaluate the thesis using the evaluation table. The following aspects shall be considered:
Are the general quality requirements for doctoral theses of Aalto University fulfilled in the thesis you are examining?
- Novelty: The doctoral thesis contains new scientific knowledge in the field it represents.
- Presentation: The doctoral thesis presents the new results clearly and scientifically and the language of the thesis is fluent.
- Contribution: The independent contribution of the doctoral student is sufficient and clearly demonstrable.
- Scientific methods: The research methods, experimental setups, measurements, and the data presented fulfil the criteria set for scientific research.
- Research ethics: The doctoral thesis conforms to the principles of responsible conduct of research and adheres to ethically sustainable principles
Please note that if you evaluated that any of the above quality requirements are are not fullfilled (=fail), you should suggest either D or E on the question below. Please fill this out in the evaluation table.
Is the thesis ready to be published?
Based on your evaluation, please give your recommendation by selecting one of the following:
- A: The manuscript can be published as is.
- B: The manuscript can be published after minor revision: revision is to be made to the satisfaction of the supervisor.
- C: Revision is needed before publication: revision is to be made to the satisfaction of the Doctoral Programme Committee after the supervisor’s review.
- D: Major revision is needed: a revised manuscript and a report on corrections/changes/counterarguments must be sent back to the pre-examiner for re-examination.
- E: The current thesis manuscript is not acceptable.
Overall evaluation
Please also give your overall evaluation of the doctoral thesis in its current state, on the scale 0–5.
0 fail
1 satisfactory
2 very satisfactory
3 good
4 very good
5 excellent
Doctoral thesis award
In the School of Electrical Engineering about 10% of the doctoral thesis are awarded annually. If you consider the thesis to be of exceptionally high quality on international level and should be recommended for a doctoral thesis award, please indicate this in your statement. If the thesis is of particular scientific merit, particularly significant in its field of research and has outstanding international significance, the pre-examiner should propose it to be awarded with the annual thesis award. In this case, the thesis should be among the top 10 % of its field and fulfill the following requirements:
- the thesis has particular scientific merits
- the results are exceptionally significant in the research field
- the articles in an article-based thesis have been published in international scientific series of high standard, or in exceptional cases in other equivalent publication fora subject to peer review
- the student has a significant independent contribution in obtaining the results
- the manner of representation is clear, and the language and reference practice used are first-rate