<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
		>

<channel>
	<title>UniResearch Community | Ping Lu | Activity</title>
	<link>https://community.uniresearch.ai/members/pinglu/activity/</link>
	<atom:link href="https://community.uniresearch.ai/members/pinglu/activity/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<description>Activity feed for Ping Lu.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 11 Sep 2026 11:08:05 +0800</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>https://buddypress.org/?v=3.4.4</generator>
	<language>en-US</language>
	<ttl>30</ttl>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>2</sy:updateFrequency>
		
								<item>
				<guid isPermaLink="false">c2ac78ea93878b9cb8390b69c812bfed</guid>
				<title>Ping Lu posted a new activity comment</title>
				<link>https://community.uniresearch.ai/news-feed/p/984/#acomment-1001</link>
				<pubDate>Wed, 09 Sep 2026 02:39:13 +0800</pubDate>

									<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Never argue about rejection decisions via private emails.</p>
				<strong>In reply to</strong> -
					<a href="https://community.uniresearch.ai/members/franknelson/" data-bb-hp-profile="298" rel="nofollow">Frank Nelson</a> posted an update <p><strong>Question</strong></p>
<p>After your paper gets accepted or rejected, is it acceptable to contact reviewers for further discussion of their comments? Are there situations you should definitely avoid doing this?</p>					]]></content:encoded>
				
				
							</item>
					<item>
				<guid isPermaLink="false">6d56e881746c2a2345d5c20ed00f3b48</guid>
				<title>Ping Lu posted a new activity comment</title>
				<link>https://community.uniresearch.ai/news-feed/p/795/#acomment-816</link>
				<pubDate>Tue, 01 Sep 2026 11:11:01 +0800</pubDate>

									<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Pay attention to reviewer comments from past rejections.</p>
				<strong>In reply to</strong> -
					<a href="https://community.uniresearch.ai/members/zacharyedwards/" data-bb-hp-profile="310" rel="nofollow">Edwards</a> posted an update Common proposal rejection causes include unclear research gaps, unfocused research questions and unrealistic implementation plans. Spend enough time polishing your research background [&hellip;]					]]></content:encoded>
				
				
							</item>
					<item>
				<guid isPermaLink="false">146ee913cad387d5d93f1cce8d76a9fc</guid>
				<title>Ping Lu posted an update: Mismatched expectations between supervisors and [&#133;]</title>
				<link>https://community.uniresearch.ai/news-feed/p/778/</link>
				<pubDate>Mon, 31 Aug 2026 12:28:04 +0800</pubDate>

									<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Mismatched expectations between supervisors and students create unnecessary stress. Early written communication about output, timeline and responsibilities can reduce conflicts.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				
									<slash:comments>3</slash:comments>
				
							</item>
					<item>
				<guid isPermaLink="false">3a09464fabc0399ee072f426d76e8cf5</guid>
				<title>Ping Lu posted an update: Paper Writing Guidance
The discussion section is easy [&#133;]</title>
				<link>https://community.uniresearch.ai/news-feed/p/726/</link>
				<pubDate>Fri, 28 Aug 2026 13:42:41 +0800</pubDate>

									<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>Paper Writing Guidance</strong></p>
<p>The discussion section is easy to write repetitively. Avoid simply restating experimental results; focus on interpreting meaning, analyzing limitations and pointing out future research directions.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				
									<slash:comments>3</slash:comments>
				
							</item>
					<item>
				<guid isPermaLink="false">a521082502b839c422c7c966de210155</guid>
				<title>Ping Lu posted an update: Finding good public datasets for method validation takes [&#133;]</title>
				<link>https://community.uniresearch.ai/news-feed/p/608/</link>
				<pubDate>Tue, 25 Aug 2026 09:43:34 +0800</pubDate>

									<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Finding good public datasets for method validation takes a lot of digging. What are your go‑to high‑quality open datasets for general‑purpose method benchmarking in your field?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				
									<slash:comments>4</slash:comments>
				
							</item>
		
	</channel>
</rss>
		