Publishing a paper without supervisor I recently wrote a scientific article (let's say, about a methodology for predictive analyzes) I would like to submit. The article is beneficial for my PhD as it has close relationship with another paper I am currently writing.

However, I am concerned about its publication:


I don't want to put the name of my supervisor since he has (almost) no knowledge about what I wrote about. I barely think he can even provide constructed critics (if he checks the paper), and I am very unsatisfied about his way of not doing research (only participating to conferences) and taking appropriation of others work. I know, this is probably common in academia but I am the type of person working 8-10 hours everyday (week-end included) to get the job done (plus to get recognition).
To develop the methodology, I needed to learn and implement some mathematical models (and related algorithms) over the last 4 months. However, I have started everything from scratch, which means I am not an expert with 10 years of experience that can accurately see if the work I did requires strong modifications or not.


I am not quite sure about publishing alone since I don't think an editor would be convinced to do it that way. I was thinking about looking for a scientist (in conferences possibly) with whom I can work with so that he could make a proper review about my work (and add his name on it). I am not quite sure about this though, I don't think someone can steal my research (if we consider worse case of doing this).

My supervisor proposed me a post-doc already, I don't really want to envenom our relationship but let's say this is the type of person who (probably) doesn't care about recognition (thus having his name on papers). I may be wrong though.

My question is, do you think I should accept publishing with my supervisor or consider an alternative option?
On one hand, you seem to have a research advisor who is quite supportive of you; he has already offered you a post-doctoral position when you finish.  On the other hand, you are concerned that he tends to attach himself to, and take credit for, work on which he is only peripherally involved.  This places you in something of a quandary, since your advisor has not made a meaningful contribution to your paper.

However, I would suggest that you show your advisor the paper to get his feedback.  Even if that feedback is not useful in terms of the content of the manuscript, your advisor probably has a good understanding of how papers should be written, and where they should be submitted.  Moreover, when other scholars are evaluating work done by graduate students, you are not going to be significantly penalized for having your advisor as a co-author.   Having a paper that is co-authored by your advisor, but with you as the first authors, is not going to be perceived as that different from  a single-author publication.

Perhaps your advisor will make some useful comments, but he will decline to be an author on the paper.  (This happened to me, in my interactions with my advisor, more than once.)  You seem to think that your author is not likely to be magnanimous in this way, which is, in the abstract, unfortunate.  However, as I stated above, having you advisor as a co-author is unlikely to be counted against you in a significant way, and maintaining a good relationship with your advisor (for whom you man continue working as a post-doc) can be extremely important for a future research career.  So I do not think that you have much to lose by showing your paper to your advisor and getting the advantage of your advisor's guidance.