0

I have to write an abstract which present my research and results. Do you think the following sentences are right in terms of tense and using of passive together?

1."It has been observed that the unsteady simulations with first method are not capable of predicting details pertaining to flow physics".

2."Overall, both the unsteady simulation approaches have been successfully validated by experiments for the computation of the speed. The unsteady method provides more accurate results"

Thanks

  • 1
    It depends on who observed it. If you (the author) observed it, according to the conventions of scientific papers, you should use the simple past—"it was observed". If some other researcher observed it, the present perfect is fine. – Peter Shor Mar 6 '16 at 4:35
  • Those aren't in the past tense - they're in the present perfect (has been observed, have been ... validated) and the simple present (are not, provides). Nonetheless, I would say that they are both perfectly grammatical. – Anonym Mar 6 '16 at 4:36
  • Thank you for your kind comments. If the author observes the results, I can use the passive with present tense? 1."It is observed that the unsteady simulations with the first method are not capable of predicting details pertaining to flow physics". 2."Overall, both the unsteady simulation approaches are successfully validated by experiments for the computation of the speed. The unsteady method provides more accurate results" Thanks – h747 Mar 6 '16 at 14:19
1

You aren't using the past tense in those sentences; you're using the present perfect tense (has been observed; have been successfully validated). If you are referring to work that you did and are reporting on in this paper, you should be using the past tense.

The convention not to use "I" or "we" has led to a convention in scientific writing where verb tenses are used instead to convey some of this information. The simple past is used for the work that the authors did described in this paper, while the present perfect is used for research done by other people or in previous papers of the authors. (Since you're supposed to cite any previous research, these two cases aren't truly ambiguous.)

So for example:

Rocks have been collected from the moon. These rocks were prepared for electron microscopy and analyzed for signs of life.

Translation: somebody else collected rocks from the moon. We looked at them using an electron microscope to see whether we could see any evidence of life.

Rocks were collected from the moon. These rocks were prepared for electron microscopy and analyzed for signs of life.

Translation: we went to the moon and collected some rocks. We then looked at them using an electron microscope ...

See this document for more about tenses in scientific manuscripts where you avoid first person pronouns. I quote some relevant sentences:

The methods section should use the past tense because it is a report of what was done during the course of the study.

When referring to a previous study with results that are still relevant, use the present perfect tense.

(So if you're writing about somebody else's results that you show are incorrect, you should use the past tense.)

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.