Before submitting your manuscript for pre-examination, please check that

1. Your manuscript must be complete and ready for examination (as confirmed by your supervising professor).
   • Your manuscript complies with Aalto University's general and your doctoral programme's specific requirements, read more about the format, scope and quality of the doctoral thesis.
   • The language of your manuscript has been checked (see below).
   • It is highly recommended that you check the originality of your manuscript in Turnitin, see instructions.
2. Your supervising professor has contacted pre-examinersfor your manuscript, see instructions for supervising professors
3. You have completed the required credits (ECTS) according to your confirmed credit plan (Sisu) and you have an up-to-date career plan, see Doctoral personal study plan (DPSP) (if uncertain, please contact your doctoral programme's Doctoral education services).

Also make sure that you are enrolled to Aalto University for the ongoing academic term and that your supervising professor and thesis advisor(s) are confirmed, if that has not been done earlier. You can check the information in MyStudies. Possible missing advisors can be confirmed with the pre-examination decision. 

To understand what happens in the pre-examination process of your doctoral thesis, see below the steps required for getting a permission for defence. The official decisions regarding the process are made by your School’s Doctoral programme committee (DPC).

1. Doctoral student has completed the required credits according to their confirmed credit plan (Sisu).
2. Doctoral student presents their finalised manuscript to their supervising professor who confirms that it is ready for pre-examination.
3. Doctoral student applies for pre-examination.
   • Supervising professor proposes two pre-examiners, who are willing, available and impartial, to DPC.
4. DPC decides on sending the doctoral thesis for pre-examination and appoints two pre-examiners.
   • Doctoral programme informs all parties of the decision of DPC and sends all the material to the pre-examiners.
   • The doctoral student cannot contact the pre-examiners during the pre-examination phase.
5. The pre-examiners send their statements to the Doctoral programme
6. DPC decides on the permission for public defense based on statements of the pre-examiners. The student has the right to submit an official written response.*
7. After the permission for defence has been granted, a proposal for the details of the defence, the opponent and the custos can be approved by DPC

Permission for public defence is also the approval for publishing - you cannot send your thesis to print before you have permission for defence. Please also note that you cannot start publishing before the name of the opponent, custos and the date of defence are confirmed by DPC, as they need to be printed on the thesis.

* You can submit an official written response e.g. if a pre-examiner has gravely misunderstood something in your thesis and there are significant mistakes in the statement that may affect the DPC's decision on granting permission for public defence. Submit your official written response before the decision of DPC.

More information below

Pre-examiners' statements and permission for defence 

How to confirm the details for your defence, opponent(s) and custos?

How to publish your thesis? 

You should always check the language of your manuscript before pre-examination. Fluent language will make your thesis more readable for the examiners. When scheduling your thesis process, remember to reserve time for the language revision (professional language revision is recommended, especially if you are not writing in your native language). The purpose of checking the language of the manuscript before the pre-examination is to allow the pre-examiners to concentrate on the content of the thesis and not be sidetracked by bad language.

The Doctoral Programme Committee may, at its discretion, require proof of professional language revision. This could happen in cases where there are notable problems with the readability of the text due to bad language.

The doctoral programmes do not cover the cost of the language revision. In some cases the research group or the department may cover the costs.

BIZ: Doctoral students can apply for grant for language revision from the Helsinki School of Economics Support Foundation (this application can be submitted anytime). Please note that HSE Support Foundation can fund language revisions only up to a certain sum. Please check the details from the foundation.

Defining the central terminology of the research is an important part of the doctoral thesis work. Aalto University is creating mechanisms to add new terminology from doctoral theses to the Helsinki Term Bank for the Arts and Sciences (HTB). In the autumn 2024 doctoral students who are in the pre-examination phase are expected to add their key terminology to the Term Bank.

Working with the Term Bank firstly entails confirming that the central terms of the doctoral research are up to date in the Term Bank. Secondly, the doctoral student must update and supplement the information available, if necessary, and add their thesis as reference for the terms in question.

Detailed instructions will be availble in the autumn 2024.

More information

See your School's contact information in case you have any questions about the instructions on this page. Please use this address also for sending your thesis manuscript by Funet FileSender, if it is too large to include in the Webropol form.

ARTS
Contact us: [email protected] 
ARTS key dates

BIZ
Contact us: [email protected]
BIZ key dates

CHEM
Contact us: [email protected] 
CHEM key dates

ELEC
Contact us: [email protected]
ELEC key dates

ENG
Contact us: [email protected] 
ENG key dates

SCI
Contact us: [email protected] & [email protected] 
SCI key dates

The recommended place for the abstracts is at the beginning of the thesis. The thesis includes 1-3 abstracts:

• 1 abstract: one abstract in English if the author has not their basic education in Finnish or Swedish,
• 2 abstracts: one abstract in English and another in Finnish or Swedish if the author has received his/her basic school education in Finland in Finnish or Swedish.
• 3 abstracts: it is possible to include one abstract in English, one in Finnish and one in Swedish. Attn. Cotutelle cases

Abstract templates

You may use the final abstract forms in the publication platform. You also have the possibility to create a pre-examination version of your whole manuscript in the publication platform, if you so wish. Please note: Do not order anything at the publication platform in the pre-examination phase, since an order will result in a printed thesis with ISBN and serial numbers and costs. The order must be placed later, once you have permission for public defense.

Login to the platform, choose the thesis template according to your School, fill out the required information at "Publishing options" (School, language, type of thesis) and then choose "Thesis title pages" from the menu on the left and fill out the required information.

You are asked for the following information (please fill in only the information which is known, the rest you can leave empty at the pre-examination stage, especially the dates)

• Publisher: Your School
• Unit: Your Department
• Field of research: Your confirmed research field. You can check this from Sisu.
• Manuscript submitted: The date when the pre-examiners were appointed by the Doctoral Programme Committee
• Permission for public defence granted: The date when permission for public defence was granted.
• Date of the defence:

The length of the abstract is approximately 2 500 - 3 000 characters (including spaces), or one A4. Ensure that your abstract fits the one-page format of the abstract template. Save the title page (inc. abstract) PDF from preview.

You can also create the thesis covers, but it is not required at this stage yet.

If relevant in your doctoral thesis, list the abbreviations and symbols in alphabetical order. Group the symbols with Latin letters (PDF) in one group, symbols with Greek letters (PDF) in another group and other symbols in a third group.

The list of publications is an important section of the article-based thesis. It declares which publications are included in the thesis. All necessary bibliographic data concerning the publications must be included in the list. Do not list your possible other publications, which are not included in the thesis and do not mention if e.g. the publication has been awarded with a best paper award. Only bibliographic information regarding the publication should be included.

Bibliographic information needed regarding the published articles

Article in a peer-reviewed journal:

• All author names in the correct order, title of publication, full journal name (not abbreviated), volume, issue, pages, month, year.
• Follow the reference style that you have chosen for your manuscript.
• In some cases the publications do not carry issue number, or the month of the publication is not given. In certain series, the page numbers are replaced by article number.

The digital object identifier (doi) can also be included for the benefit of the reader. Example: doi:10.1109/TAP.2019.2963587

Publication in peer-reviewed conference proceedings:

• All author names in the correct order, title of publication, "in Proceedings of the" and the full name of the conference, venue, dates, page numbers/number of pages.
• Follow the reference style that you have chosen for your manuscript.

Bibliographic information needed regarding the manuscripts submitted for publication

• All author names in the correct order, title of publication, number of pages, "submitted to publication forum XX", month and year (time when the manuscript was submitted for publication). Example: Publication IV: A. Author and B. Author: “Interesting paper worthy of publication" 8 pages, Submitted to Nature Communications, October 2022.
• Follow the reference style that you have chosen for your manuscript.

ARTS

The article thesis must include at least three full-length articles. These articles must have been approved for publication in a peer-reviewed scientific journal, in a similarly peer-reviewed conference publication, or as a chapter in a peer-reviewed book. In addition to the three articles, the thesis may include other publications, shorter articles or artistic components. For one of these additional publications, the publication process may still be ongoing.

In case of unpublished articles, please include the acceptance for publication (email is sufficient) in your pre-examination request. If for one of your additional publications the publication process is still ongoing, include documentation of their phase.

CHEM

If your submitted article that is included in the thesis manuscript gets accepted or fails for publication during the pre-examination process, you should immediately inform the Secretary of the Doctoral Programme Committee.

If article submission was rejected during the pre-examination, a revised article must be prepared and resubmitted without delay.

If an article gets accepted before the printing of the final thesis has started, doctoral student can update the final publication version to the thesis.

ELEC

At least half of the articles included in the thesis must have been published or accepted for publication when the manuscript is submitted for pre-examination. See more information at Forms of doctoral thesis (ELEC).

If your submitted article that is included in the thesis manuscript gets accepted for publication during the pre-examination process, you should immediately inform the ELEC Doctoral education services and send the accepted version to the personnel. The personnel will inform the pre-examiners of this change in status of the manuscript.

SCI

If your submitted article that is included in the thesis manuscript gets accepted for publication during the pre-examination process, you should immediately inform the SCI Doctoral education services and send the accepted version to the personnel. The personnel will inform the pre-examiners of this change in status of the manuscript.

The doctoral student is responsible for ensuring that appropriate permissions are obtained for all copyright images, tables, figures and other data included in the published doctoral thesis. Same applies to articles included in article-based thesis.

If you already haven't, please request permission to publish articles in your doctoral thesis in printed and electronic form from the publisher of that article. It is your responsibility to store the permissions.

You may use the article permission inquiry template available at Doctoral student forms (aalto.fi).

Using published figures in the thesis summary part: Publisher’s reprint permission must be required from the copy-right owner, such as publisher. Always credit the source for images and figures.

If it is doctoral student’s own paper, many publishers grant the right to use figures and pictures. Check each journal’s instructions.

After the permission for public defence has been granted only minor corrections (eg. spelling mistakes) are allowed to be done.

Without permission from the Doctoral programme committee, you are, for example, not allowed to:

• Change the title of the thesis
• Change the results in the thesis
• Add/remove/change articles/manuscripts

If a submitted article that is included in your thesis gets accepted for publication you can change the manuscript to the accepted version if no changes to the content of the article has been made.

Check for School-specific detailed instructions under the section Pre-examination statements and permission for defence below.

In case of co-authored publications the doctoral student's independent contribution to them must be demonstrated. If the contribution is not demonstrated in the publication, an account of the contribution of the doctoral student and of the other authors must be given in the summary. The student must ask and receive the approval of the other authors for the account given.

For a clarification of the authors' responsibilities and contributions in essay-based thesis, BIZ contribution model available at Doctoral student forms | Aalto University.

Author's contribution's style model available at Doctoral student forms | Aalto University

• Use initials for each author, not full names at Authors contribution page. Also note that publishers such as Elsevier have similar instructions.
• How to write Authors contribution for monograph thesis: start with “Following persons have contributed to this work” then list these contributors with affiliations. Roles: clear explanation of how each one has contributed.
• Each contributor must be mentioned with name, use initials; and their contribution for the paper.
• If needed, a clarification of subcontracting used for the thesis work

Article-based thesis

In an article-based thesis containing publications with joint authorship, the doctoral student´s contribution needs to be clearly explained. It must be evident that each publication included in the thesis contains sufficient independent contribution by the doctoral student. To show this, the student must write an author’s contribution description, explaining what the author of the thesis has contributed with in each of the publications. If the co-authors have had a significant role in contributing to the publications, it may be beneficial to briefly describe their contribution as well.

This author’s contribution description is then placed in the beginning of the thesis manuscript with the list of publications. This description is also submitted with the pre-examination application as a separate PDF file which has been checked and signed by the supervising professor and approved by the co-authors.

Contribution types are for example idea generation, the research design, collection of data and research material, experiments, management of data and research material, data analysis,verification and analysis of findings, visualization of results, writing of the text of the publication, and editing the text at different stages.

Examples of author’s contribution descriptions:

The author = doctoral student A, B, C = co-authors

Example 1 (the candidate is the first author; second author is the supervising professor)

The author implemented all simulations and measurements and wrote the entirety of the paper. A supervised this research.

Example 2 (first author of three or more)

The original research idea came from A. The author designed and ran the experiments and analyzed the results. The author wrote about 90% of the paper with the support of the co-authors.

Example 3 (second author of two)

The author and B equally contributed to the research and writing of the paper.

Example 4 (one of many authors; co-author C will include the same paper in a thesis)

The author and co-authors planned this study. The author conducted all the work described in Sections 3 and 4 and wrote them, except for Section 4.3, which was written by C. C performed the theoretical analysis.

Example 5 (the author is the N^th author among many)

The author planned and conducted the validation study.The author participated in the writing of Section 4 and produced Figures 5 and 6.

Monograph

In a monograph, the contribution of the doctoral student shall be explained in the beginning of the thesis manuscript, preferably in the introduction part. If the other members of the research group have had a significant role in the research conducted, their contributions may be briefly described as well. The author’s contribution description is also submitted with the pre-examination application as a separate PDF file which has been checked and signed by the supervising professor and approved by the other researchers.

In order to determine the doctoral student’s independent contribution to the research and writing work of the thesis, the doctoral student must prepare an author’s contribution.

In article-based theses containing articles with joint authorship, the doctoral student´s contribution needs to be clearly explained. This explanation should be placed in the beginning of the manuscript with the list of publications. If the co-authors have had a significant role in contributing to the articles it may be beneficial to briefly describe their contribution as well. The author’s contribution shall be checked by the supervising professor and approved by the other authors.

In monographs, the contribution of the doctoral student shall be explained in the beginning of the manuscript, preferably in the introduction part. If the other members of the research group have had a significant role in the research conducted, it may be beneficial to briefly describe their contribution as well. The author’s contribution shall be checked and signed by the supervising professor and approved by the other authors.

Contribution of the author in article-based and essay-based doctoral theses

In order to determine the doctoral student’s independent contribution to any co-authored publication in the doctoral thesis manuscript, the doctoral student must prepare an author’s contribution in collaboration with the supervising professor. Author’s contribution precisely outlines the extent of the contribution and roles of all authors including the doctoral student and all co-authors of the publications. Doctoral students are recommended to submit this description to the co-authors.

Examples of author’s contribution by departments are described below. Examples follow the traditions and practices of the different research fields in the School of Science. The doctoral students are advised to discuss the suitable examples as well as the exact wording with the supervising professor.

These guidelines will apply to all doctoral thesis manuscripts sent for pre-examination from 1 August 2020 (decision of the Doctoral Programme Committee 16 June 2020).

DC = doctoral student
A-H = co-authors

Department of Applied Physics

DC, A and B conceived the experiment. C, D, and E carried out the sample growth. DC did the experiments. DC and A analyzed the experimental data. F and G planned and carried out the quantum calculations. B and H developed the theoretical model and established its implications. H carried out the numerical calculations. DC, A and B wrote the manuscript with input from all coauthors.

Department of Computer Science

Example 1

The main authors of the article were A and B. A came up with the main idea and designed the algorithms. A together with B carried out the theoretical analysis of the algorithms. DC implemented the software and ran the experiments. B was responsible for the statistical analysis of the data from the experiments. The contribution of DC to the writing of the paper was about 20 per cent.

Example 2

DC is the main author of the paper. DC came up with the main insights in the paper, did all of the writing, and implemented about 30 percent of the program code. A contributed to the theoretical analysis and wrote all of the proofs. B implemented the rest (about 70 per cent) of the program code for the experiments.

Department of Industrial Engineering and Management

DC developed and explicated the theoretical contributions, and wrote the article. Based on the original idea of the DC, A conducted the data collection and built the simulation model.  B instructed data collection and modeling and supported the reporting of the results. C provided comments and suggestions for writing of the article.

Department of Mathematics and Systems Analysis

Example 1

DC and A proved the main result of the paper and wrote that up; B proposed the problem and wrote the introduction.

Example 2

All co-authors contributed equally to all parts of the paper.

Department of Neuroscience and Biomedical Engineering

DC, A and B conceived the experiment. C, D, and E prepared the stimuli and experimental paradigm. DC did the experiments. DC and A analyzed the experimental data. F and G planned and carried out the data analyses. B and H interpreted the analysis results. DC, A and B wrote the initial version of the manuscript with input from all coauthors. DC and A wrote the final version of the manuscript with approval of all coauthors.

Contribution of the author in monographs

Doctoral student´s own contribution in the monograph shall be explained in the beginning of the doctoral thesis manuscript, preferably in the introduction. If i.e. other members of the research group have had significant role in the research conducted, their contribution should be described as well. The doctoral students are advised to discuss the contribution as well as the exact wording with the supervising professor.

Pre-examiners have 1,5 months to give their statements. 

Changes and corrections

• The pre-examiners' statements may contain suggestions for corrections and improvements.
• If changes are made to the manuscript after pre-examination, doctoral student needs to send a detailed list of corrections to the Secretary of the Committee. The purpose of the list of corrections is to respond to the possible corrections and/or suggestions presented by the pre-examiners in their statements.
• Refer to the page numbers of the manuscript to which the corrections have been made, or indicate the changed paragraphs/sections in some other way, so that the members of the Committee have the possibility to check the changes.

Minor or substantial corrections

• If the required changes or corrections are minor, the supervising professor is responsible for ensuring that the doctoral student makes the required corrections and changes. Minor changes may include the need for additional material acquired with moderate effort or the need for further inclusion of research literature.
• If the changes or corrections required by either of the pre-examiners are substantial, a second round of pre-examination is arranged after the doctoral student has made the required corrections and changes. Substantial changes and corrections may, in addition to those mentioned above, include revisions of research design and the development of the argument.
• In this second pre-examination round, the manuscript can be examined either by one or both pre-examiners, depending on the statements in the first round. If a pre-examiner is proposing substantial revisions and is willing to pre-examine a revised version of the manuscript, it can be sent to this pre-examiner without a decision by the Doctoral Programme Committee. In this case, the supervising professor must agree that the revised version is ready, and it will be sent to the pre-examiners by the Secretary of the Committee. If new pre-examiners need to be appointed, the Doctoral Programme Committee decides how the second pre-examination round will be arranged, based on the proposal of supervising professor.
• The second pre-examination round can usually be arranged at the earliest 3 months after the first round and at the latest 12 months after it. If the doctoral student needs more than 12 months to make the revisions, the matter expires and the pre-examination process will begin again from the appointing of the pre-examiners, unless the Committee decides otherwise due to unusual circumstances.
• In cases where a second pre-examination round is needed, the supervising professor needs to give grounds for the selection of the pre-examiners in the second round, if they are not the same persons as in the first round. These grounds can be, e.g., that the same pre-examiners are not available for a second round, the topic has changed, or that a different kind of expertise is needed.

If a pre-examiner recommends denying the permission of public defence

• If the manuscript has serious deficiencies with the quality of research and/or research integrity, the pre-examiner must propose that the permission for public defence is not granted.
• In case one or more pre-examiners propose that the permission is denied, the doctoral student has the right to stop the examination process. The stopping of the process means that the Doctoral Programme Committee will not handle the proposals of the pre-examiners, and the pre-examination process expires. The examination process is stopped by informing the Secretary of the Doctoral Programme Committee in writing.
• If the process is stopped but the doctoral student wishes to continue to work on the doctoral thesis, they need to negotiate with the supervising professor and submit a new research plan to the Doctoral Programme Committee. A doctoral thesis based on the new research plan can be submitted for pre-examination at the earliest 6 months after the new research plan has been accepted.
• If the doctoral student chooses not to stop the process, the Committee shall make a decision. In this case the student should submit a written reply to the statements to the Secretary of the Doctoral Programme Committee by the meeting deadline.

Pre-examiners have 6 weeks to submit their statements.

Statements from the pre-examiners and correction report

Once the statements of the pre-examiners have arrived, the Committee's secretary sends them to the doctoral student and the supervising professor. The doctoral student must make an official reply, i.e. answer to the suggestions and comments and show the corrections based on the pre-examination statements. Also, if  a submitted paper has been accepted or altered during the pre-examination process, include the updated status information of this paper in reply to the Committee.

Doctoral student replies to given comments and submits these documents to the Committee for the right to publish thesis:

1. Final version of thesis manuscript (possibly with updated information of submitted publications)
2. Report of corrections: Doctoral student copies each remark and makes a numbered list of them (a), then replies to the each point of pre-examiner's remarks (b), and the list of changes and additions based on the statements. Together with this correction report, submit also the supervising professor's approval for it.
3. Tracked changes copy of manuscript as PDF

Your response must be clear, detailed and robust. Revised manuscript and report of corrections must be approved by supervising professor before submission to the Doctoral Programme Committee. Please note that the report might be submitted to the pre-examiners again for the second pre-examination round. Also the Opponent can request to have them prior to the defence. Technical corrections such as spelling and grammar corrections and the quality of figures and tables can be fixed until the start of printing.

Candidate has max. 12 months time to reply, correct and submit the report and the revised manuscript to the secretary of the Committee, but candidates are strongly adviced to make carefully revision as soon as possible. If submission of correction report accepted by the supervising professor exceeds 12 months time line, the pre-examination process will be ended with decision of "fail".

Decision making of the Doctoral Programme Committee

The Doctoral Programme Committee makes a decision on granting permission for public defence after receiving both pre-examination statements. When making the decision, the Doctoral Programme Committee takes into account the dissertation itself, the statements of the pre-examiners as well as a possible official written reply submitted by the doctoral candidate.

The decision will be such as one the following listed below:

• The dissertation has nothing in particular to correct. Permission for public defence is granted. 
• The doctoral candidate has made minor corrections to the dissertation as suggested by the pre-examiners. Permission for public defence can be granted.
• The doctoral candidate is expected to make moderate corrections to the dissertation as suggested by the pre-examiners. The committee will discuss the permission for public defence again.
• The doctoral candidate is required to make major corrections to the dissertation as suggested by the pre-examiners. The committee will discuss the permission for public defence again. Possibly asking one of pre-examiners for second statement of the revised manuscript.
• The contents of the dissertation require extensive revisions along with other corrections and suggestions for improvement. Revised dissertation may need 2nd examination round for the acceptence.
• The dissertation at the present state does not meet the requirements for the doctoral thesis. One or all pre-examiners mark "fail" to the grading table. Committee will decide how to proceed with it.

Permission for public defence - decision process of the Doctoral Programme Committee

It takes on average 6 months to graduate after submission of manuscript for pre-examination.  Please check the approximate timeline from pre-examination to graduation. The timeline gives you hints about processing times in different steps. The steps are listed below:

1. The statements of the pre-examiners arrive, and the presenting official sends them to you and your supervising professor.
2. You have 4 working days to make an official written response*, if necessary. Please note that official written response in not the same thing as the response letter that addresses the corrections and is written after the decision. So, if you are satisfied with the statements and there are no misunderstandings in them, you don’t write the official response. We recommend that you inform the Doctoral Education Services of ELEC also if you will not write an official response. This fastens the process in many cases.

3. First decision based on the statements. The Doctoral Programme Committee makes decision on granting permission for public defence. When making the decision, the Doctoral Programme Committee pays attention to the thesis itself, the statements of the pre-examiners, and the possible official written response* submitted by the student.
   
   The decisions are made in an email meeting or in a regular committee meeting. An email meeting is not held if the Doctoral Programme Committee members have a significant disagreement over granting permission for public defence, or if the doctoral student has made an official written response on the statements of the pre-examiners. In such cases the Doctoral Programme Committee will always discuss the matter of granting permission for public defence in a regular meeting. You can read more about decision schedule on the Doctoral Programme Committee's page.

   Informing on the decision. The presenting official informs you and your supervising professor on the decision by email. The decision types (A-E) and required corrections and documents are described below.

4. Corrections and response letter. You correct the thesis, as suggested in the statements, and write a response letter describing the corrections made and answering to the comments of the pre-examiners. The supervising professor approves the corrections. The required documents are submitted to the Doctoral Education Services of ELEC. You can read more about schedule for the submission of corrections on the Doctoral Programme Committee's page.

5. Second round decision / confirmation based on the corrections. Depending on the previous decision, either the whole Committee will check the corrections and make a new decision (if the previous decision was C or D), or the Committee Chair will check the corrections and confirm the conditional permission (previous decision B).

   Informing on the decision. The presenting official informs you and your supervising professor by email on the decision of the Doctoral Programme Committee/ Committee Chair. 

*Official written response: The doctoral student has a chance to make an official written response on the pre-examiners' statements. An official written response can be made, e.g., if the pre-examiner has misunderstood something in the thesis and there are significant mistakes in the statement that may affect the decision on granting permission for public defence. An official written response is to be made before the first decision of the Doctoral Programme Committee. A possible official written response is sent to the Doctoral Education Services of ELEC.

The decision types for permission for public defence

Different categories for the decisions are listed below. You can read more about the decisions and required corrections here.

You can read more about schedule for the submission of corrections on the Doctoral Programme Committee's page.

Category A: Permission granted

The thesis has nothing in particular to correct. Permission for public defence is granted as is. The supervising professor will check the minor linguistic and/or editorial corrections, if needed. Read more.

If you get decision A on the first or further decision round, you should write this decision date on the abstract page of your thesis at the publication platform.

Category B: Permission conditionally granted

Conditional permission for public defence is granted to the manuscript. The doctoral student is advised to make minor corrections to the doctoral thesis as suggested by the pre-examiners, and within the given deadline. The corrections will not be taken to the Doctoral Programme Committee for a new decision, but the Chair of the Committee will evaluate the corrections made and will confirm the public defence. Read more.

If you get conditional permission for public defence, you should write this decision date on the abstract page of your thesis at the publication platform (not the date of further confirmation).

Category C: Permission not granted, corrections required

The doctoral student is advised to make moderate corrections to the doctoral thesis as suggested by the pre-examiners, and within the given deadline. The Doctoral Programme Committee will make a new decision after receiving the corrections. Read more.

Category D: Permission not granted, corrections required

The doctoral student is advised to make major corrections to the doctoral thesis as suggested by the pre-examiners, and within the given deadline. After receiving the corrections the Doctoral Programme Committee will make a new decision on sending the revised thesis for re-examination. Read more.

Category E: Rejected

The manuscript in its current form is rejected. The contents of the thesis require extensive revisions along with other corrections and suggestions for improvement. If a corrected manuscript is submitted, the pre-examination process starts over. Read more.

Changes after permission for public defence has been granted

After the permission for public defence has been granted, you are allowed to do only minor corrections (eg. spelling mistakes), or corrections required by the Doctoral Programme Committee.

Without permission from the Doctoral Programme Committee, you are, for example, not allowed to:

• Change the title of the thesis
• Change the results in the thesis
• Add/remove/change articles/manuscripts to other ones

If a submitted article that is included in your thesis gets accepted for publication you can change the manuscript to the accepted version if you have done no changes to the content of the article.

If the article is accepted for publication with the prerequisite that certain changes should be made, please follow the guidelines below:

1. If the changes asked for are minor, you can change the manuscript to the accepted version after the acceptance of your supervising professor. You need to make a freely formulated short clarification of the changes made to the manuscript and the supervising professor needs to approve these changes with their signature. You should inform Doctoral Programme Committee about these changes by sending the approved clarification to Doctoral Education Services of ELEC.
2. If you are asked to do bigger changes or add or remove substantial results, keep in the thesis the manuscript that has been included in the pre-examined thesis.

The doctoral thesis is examined electronically, but a paper version of the manuscript can also be sent to the examiners if needed.

The pre-examiners have four weeks to submit their statements. Two weeks before the deadline the Doctoral programme will send a reminder to the examiners.

Granting permission for defence

On receiving the statements of the preliminary examiners, the Doctoral programme committee (DPC) examines the dissertation and the statements.

The evaluation of the Doctoral programme committee:

Examples of the doctoral thesis examination process at the School of Engineering

CASE 1.

• Student has a chance to remark* on the pre-examiners' statements within four (4) days after receiving statements.
• DPC discusses the permission to public defence in a meeting/an e-mail meeting and grants the permission to public defence.
• The thesis has nothing in particular to correct. Permission to public defence is granted.
• The supervising professor and the student are informed of the decision.

CASE 2.

• Student has a chance to remark* on the pre-examiners' statements within four (4) days after receiving statements.
• DPC discusses the permission to public defence in a meeting/an e-mail meeting and grants the permission to public defence.
• The doctoral student is advised to consider the minor correction propositions given by the pre-examiners. Time allowed for thesis corrections is 6 weeks. Repeating the process is not required and a clarification of the made corrections is NOT needed. Permission to public defence is granted.
• The supervising professor and the student are informed of the decision.

CASE 3.

• Student has a chance to remark* on the pre-examiners' statements within four (4) days after receiving statements.
• DPC discusses the permission to public defence in a meeting/an e-mail meeting and makes a decision of the required corrections.
• The doctoral student is advised to make moderate corrections to the dissertation.Time allowed for thesis corrections is 3 months.
• The supervising professor and the student are informed of the decision.
• Revised manuscript and an account of the corrections are submitted to the DPC presenting official along with a written statement from the supervising professor.
• DPC re-examines the thesis and grants the permission to public defence.
• The supervising professor and the student are informed of the decision.

CASE 4.

• Student has a chance to remark* on the pre-examiners' statements within four (4) days after receiving statements.
• DPC discusses the permission to public defence in a meeting/an e-mail meeting and makes a decision of the required corrections.
• The doctoral student is advised to make significant  corrections. Time allowed for thesis corrections is 1 year.
• The supervising professor and the student are informed of the decision.
• Revised manuscript and an account of the corrections are submitted to the DPC presenting official along with a written statement from the supervisor.
• Revised manuscript is sent to pre-examiner(s) for additional  reviewing.
• Student has a chance to remark on the pre-examiners' statements within four (4) days after receiving the last statement.
• DPC discusses the permission to public defence in a meeting/an e-mail meeting and grants the permission to public defence.
• The supervising professor and the student are informed of the decision.

CASE 5. The doctoral thesis requires so extensive corrections that the thesis examination process starts over.

• Student has a chance to remark* on the pre-examiners' statements within four (4) days after receiving statements.
• The student can stop the examination process if the pre-examiners' statements give cause to expect DPC to give a decision to reject permission to public defence. After stopping the examination process the student may discuss continuing to write the doctoral thesis with the supervising professor.
• DPC is informed of the decision to stop the examination process.
• If the student chooses not to stop the process, DPC shall make a decision.
• The doctoral thesis requires so extensive corrections that the thesis examination process starts over.
• The supervising professor and the student are informed of the decision.
• After stopping the examination prcess the doctoral student may discuss continuing to write the doctoral thesis with the supervising professor.
• After completing the new thesis manuscript the pre-examination process will start over again. The doctoral student shall apply for permission to publish starting with selecting the pre-examiners. The supervising professor writes a separate proposal (with motivations) to DPC concerning the new pre-examiners.

LANGUAGE CHECK: The Doctoral Programme Committee may, at its discretion, require that the language of the manuscript is checked. Certificate of the language check is to be submitted to the presenting official.

*Student has a chance to remark on the pre-examiners' statements. A remark can be made, e.g. if the pre-examiner has misunderstood something in the dissertation.

An e-mail meeting of the Doctoral Programme Committee: A meeting can be held via e-mail for discussing a single matter if it is urgent or there other justifiable reasons requiring it.

An e-mail meeting is not held if the Doctoral Programme Committee has a significant disagreement over granting permission to publish or a student's remark on the pre-examiners' statements is up for discussion.

Statements of pre-examiners

Pre-examiners have 6 weeks to submit their statements. (4 weeks from 1 August 2024 onwards)

Once the statements of the pre-examiners have arrived, the presenting official sends them to the doctoral student and the supervising professor. The doctoral student is given a chance to make an official written reply on the statements of the pre-examiners within four working days. The official written reply is sent to the Doctoral Education Services.

An official written reply

The doctoral student has a chance to make an official written reply on the pre-examiners' statements. An official written reply can be made, e.g. if the pre-examiner has misunderstood something in the doctoral thesis and there are significant mistakes in the statement that may affect the decision on granting permission for public defence. An official written reply is to be made before the decision of the Doctoral Programme Committee. (Note that this will generally delay the process, so should be used only in cases of serious misunderstanding or examination errors.)

Decision making of the Doctoral Programme Committee

(Updated by the Doctoral Programme Committee 20 June 2023, new guidelines will take effect as of 1 August 2023.)

The Doctoral Programme Committee makes a decision on granting permission for public defence after receiving both pre-examination statements. When making the decision, the Doctoral Programme Committee takes into account the doctoral thesis itself, the statements of the pre-examiners as well as a possible official written reply submitted by the doctoral student.

Usually the decision is made in an email meeting. An email meeting is not held if the Doctoral Programme Committee members have a significant disagreement over granting permission for public defence or if the doctoral student has made an official written reply on the statements of the pre-examiners. In such cases the Doctoral Programme Committee will discuss the matter of granting permission for public defence in a regular meeting.

The doctoral student and the supervising professor are informed of the decision of the Doctoral Programme Committee.

The decision will be one of the following listed below:

Decision 3

• The doctoral thesis requires no or only minor revisions.
• The supervising professor checks the revisions made to the manuscript and an account of the revisions made is not required by the Doctoral Programme Committee.
• Permission for public defence is granted. 

Decision 2

• The doctoral student is advised to make revisions to the doctoral thesis as suggested by the pre-examiners. 
• The Committee will discuss the permission for public defence again.
• The corrected manuscript, an account of revisions (see below) along with a written statement from the supervising professor, confirming that the revisions have been done, are submitted to Doctoral Education Services.
• The Doctoral Programme Committee will decide on permission for public defence based on the revised doctoral thesis, the account of revisions and the statement of the supervising professor.

Decision 1

• The doctoral student is advised to make revisions to the doctoral thesis as suggested by the pre-examiners. 
• The Committee will discuss the permission for public defence again.
• The revised manuscript, an account of revisions (see below) along with a written statement from the supervising professor, confirming that the revisions have been done, are submitted to the Doctoral Programme Committee.
• The revised manuscript and the account of revisions are sent to both pre-examiners for a re-examination.
• The Doctoral Programme Committee will make a new decision on permission for public defence based on the revised doctoral thesis, the account of revisions, the statement of the supervising professor and the re-examination statements of the pre-examiners.

Decision 0*

• The requested revisions and highlighted flaws are so extensive that the Doctoral Programme Committee does not believe that an acceptable thesis can be realized in a reasonable time.
• The examination process is stopped.
• The doctoral student may discuss continuing to write the doctoral thesis with the supervising professor.
• After completing the new doctoral thesis manuscript the pre-examination process will start over again. The supervising professor writes a separate proposal (with motivations) to the Doctoral Programme Committee concerning the new pre-examiners.

* Stopping the examination process:

• The doctoral student may stop the examination process if the pre-examiners' statements give cause to expect that the Doctoral Programme Committee will not grant permission for public defence.
• The examination process can be stopped by informing the Doctoral Programme Committee about it (an email to Doctoral Education Services).
• If the doctoral student chooses not to stop the process, the Committee shall make a decision.

An account of corrections

Concerns decisions 1 ja 2 described above:

The doctoral student is requested to make a clarification of the revisions made to the doctoral thesis manuscript. In the account of revisions, the doctoral student responds to all the comments of the pre-examiners and clarifies where in the doctoral thesis the revision has been made. If no revision is made for a particular pre-examiner comment this should be justified.

Revision deadline

• Decision 2: The doctoral student has a maximum of three months from the date of the Doctoral Programme Committee’s decision to make the needed revisions to the doctoral thesis manuscript. On reasonable grounds, the time may be extended upon request.
• Decision 1: The doctoral student has a maximum of one year from the date of the Doctoral Programme Committee’s decision to make the needed revisions to the doctoral thesis manuscript.
• If the doctoral student will not be able to make the revisions to the doctoral thesis manuscript before the given deadline (which is one year from getting the decision), they may stop the examination process by informing the Doctoral Programme Committee about that (an e-mail message to Doctoral Education Services).
• If the doctoral student cannot be reached, they have not sent a revised manuscript of the doctoral thesis by the deadline, or they have not stopped the examination process, the Doctoral Programme Committee will stop the examination process in its meeting.

Language check

The Doctoral Programme Committee may, at its discretion, require that the language of the manuscript is checked. The certificate of the language check is to be submitted to the Doctoral Education Services.

Changes after permission for public defence has been granted

After the permission for public defence has been granted only minor corrections (e.g. spelling mistakes) are allowed to be done.

Without permission from the Doctoral Programme Committee, you are not allowed to:

• Change the results in the doctoral thesis
• Add/remove/change articles/manuscripts/essays to other ones
   

If a submitted article that is included in your doctoral thesis gets accepted for publication you can change the manuscript to the accepted version if no changes to the content of the article has been made.

If the article is accepted for publication with the prerequisite that certain changes should be made:

• and the changes asked for are minor, you can change the manuscript to the accepted version after the acceptance of your supervising professor. You need to make a freely formulated short clarification of the changes made to the manuscript and the supervising professor needs to approve these changes with his/her signature. The Doctoral Programme Committee will be informed of these changes by sending the approved clarification to Doctoral Education Services.
• and you are asked to do bigger changes or add or remove substantial results, the manuscript that has been granted permission for public defence should be kept in the doctoral thesis.

Usually the Doctoral Programme Committee decides about the details of the defence, the opponent and the custos together with granting the permission for defence, but they can also be decided in a later meeting.

Details of the defence

The supervising professor proposes the date and time of the defence to the Doctoral Programme Committee. The defences at the School are coordinated to avoid overlapping.

The public defence takes place at Aalto University. In the event that productions or other material essential to the thesis cannot be presented on campus or with the university’s own equipment, the public defence may take place at other premises by the decision of the Doctoral Programme Committee. Public defence can be also organised allowing remote participation.

Custos

The Doctoral Programme Committee appoints the supervising professor as the custos of the public defence. Some other professor of the School with a doctor's degree in the same research field may also serve as the custos. The custos is responsible for guiding the opponent in matters concerning the procedures of the examination of the thesis and the public defence. It is the role of the custos to discuss the grade with the opponent(s) and familiarise them with the grading scale used at the school and the principles of grading to be observed. The custos makes sure that the statement of the opponent is made according to the guidelines of the school and is submitted to the Secretary of the Doctoral Programme Committee within 2 weeks from the defence.

The Doctoral Programme Committee appoints the opponent and chairperson (custos)

• Doctoral student requests his/her supervising professor or another professor from the department to serve as a chairperson
• Professor of the major subject submits a proposal for an opponent and a chairperson to Doctoral Programme Committee. In some cases two opponents are appointed. The proposal is sent to secretary.

Appointing the opponent and custos

• The opponent can be appointed when the thesis manuscipt has sucessfully passed the pre-examination and related corrections. Use Opponent proposal form (307) (available at Doctoral student forms (aalto.fi) if all the needed information is available, ie the name of the opponent, the name of the custos, the language of the defence, the date of the defence, the time of the defence and the place for the defence.
• Supervising professor will act as the host for the opponent during their visit at Aalto University.

Please provide CHEM Doctoral education services with the following:

1. Opponent proposal (307) (signed and scanned), available at Doctoral student forms (aalto.fi)
   Date and time of defence must be agreed by the suggested opponent. Please consider the time difference between opponent, custos and the audience with remote defence.
2. CV(s) and publication list(s) of the opponent(s) either as a pdfs or as web links.
3. Public defence announcement (in Finnish/Swedish and in English)

The Doctoral Programme Committee shall make the decision within a month. The student and the custos are informed of the decision, which is valid for 6 months.

Invitation to the opponent

The presenting official of the doctoral programme will send an official invitation to the opponent on behalf of the Doctoral Programme. Together with the instructions for the defence and the opponent's evaluation statement and grading table. Later, as the printed books are available, the Doctoral Programme will send the printed dissertation to the opponent(s) and pre-examiners.

Who can be the custos at a doctoral defense?

The supervising professor of the doctoral student acts as the custos at the defense.

If the supervising professor for some cogent reason is unable to be the custos, then another professor of the School of Chemical Engineering who is appointed to a research field can substitute and act as the custos.

Please provide ELEC Doctoral education services with the following:

1. Opponent proposal (307) (signed), available at Doctoral student forms (aalto.fi). Please read carefully the instructions of the form and fill in in all details required by ELEC.
2. Grounds for the proposed opponent. Template available at Doctoral student forms (aalto.fi).
3. CV + full publication list (as instructed in the previous documents)

The Doctoral Programme Committee shall make the decision within approx. 1 week from receiving the application, in either email or regular meeting. The student and the custos are informed of the decision.

Custos at a doctoral defence

The custos is the supervisor of the defence and is responsible for guiding the doctoral student and the opponent regarding the defence. The custos makes sure that the statement of the opponent is made according to the guidelines of the school and is submitted to the student services of the doctoral programme within 2 weeks from the defence the latest.

The supervising professor of the doctoral student usually acts as the custos at the defence. If the supervising professor for some cogent reason is unable to be the custos, then another professor of the same research field can substitute and be the custos instead.

Invitation to the opponent

ELEC Doctoral education services will send the invitation to the opponent and the secretarial services will take care of the travelling arrangements of the opponent. The Doctoral Programme will not send the thesis to the opponent(s). Please see further instructions in the “Distribution of thesis” section.

Please provide ENG Doctoral education services with the following:

1. Opponent proposal (307) (signed and scanned), available at Doctoral student forms (aalto.fi)
2. CV(s) and publication list(s) of the opponent(s) as a pdfs.

The Doctoral Programme Committee shall make the decision within approx. 3 working days. The student and the custos are informed of the decision.

Invitation to the opponent

The presenting official of the doctoral programme will send an official invitation to the opponent on behalf of the Doctoral Programme. The Doctoral Programme will not send the thesis to the opponent(s).

Who can be the custos at a doctoral defense?

The Doctoral programme committee appoints one of the school’s professors as custos for the public defence. The task of the custos is to supervise the public defence and see that the guidelines directed by the university and the school are followed during the occasion. Custos is responsible for advising the candidate and opponent on the procedures regarding the examination of the dissertation and public defence before the event.

Custos sees that the statement of the opponent is written in accordance with the school’s guidelines and it is submitted to the school on time.

By tradition, a professor who has acted as supervising professor for the doctoral candidate, is generally appointed as custos. Emeritus professors may be appointed to act as custos if they have acted as supervising professor for the doctoral candidate and if they have up-to-date knowledge on the university’s processes regarding examination of the doctoral dissertation and regulations regarding public defence.

Assigning the opponent

The opponents should be among the best experts within the field in Finland and abroad. The Universities Act (Yliopistolaki 558/2009, section 44) and the Administrative Procedure Act (Hallintolaki 434/2003, sections 27 and 28) contain provisions on the disqualification of opponents of doctoral dissertations. It is preferable to select the opponents from outside Aalto University; neither of them shall be from the candidate's school nor research group in which the dissertation is done. A close relative of the candidate cannot act as an opponent. The opponent shall not be the candidate's immediate superior. If the expert has produced joint publications with the candidate within the past five years or if he/she is currently working on a publication with the candidate, he/she cannot act as an opponent. The instructions for selecting the preliminary examiners guarantee that the examination is carried out in an impartial, unchallengeable and knowledgeable way.

A second opponent may be necessary in cases where the thesis is interdisciplinary in nature.

Appointing the opponent and custos

Please check here more information about the criteria for opponents: Proposing pre-examiners and opponents (read also the SCI specific instructions at the end).

The opponent can be appointed when the thesis manuscipt has sucessfully passed the pre-examination and related corrections. Use Opponent proposal form (307) (available at Doctoral student forms (aalto.fi) if all the needed information is available, ie the name of the opponent and the custos, the language, date, time and place of the defense.

Please provide the SCI Doctoral education services with the following:

1. Opponent proposal (307) (signed and scanned), available at Doctoral student forms.
2. CV(s) and publication list(s) of the opponent(s) either as a pdfs or as web links. The CV should describe at least the education and working experience of the examiner and the publication list should be complete regarding at least the past 5 years.

The Doctoral Programme Committee shall make the decision within approx. 3 working days. The doctoral student and the custos are informed of the decision.

Invitation to the opponent

SCI Doctoral education services will send an official invitation to the opponent by email. The Doctoral Programme will not send the doctoral thesis to the opponent(s).

Who can be the custos at a doctoral defence?

The Doctoral Programme Committee appoints one of the school’s professors as custos for the public defence. The task of the custos is to supervise the public defence and to see that the guidelines directed by the university and the school are followed during the occasion. The custos is responsible for advising the student and the opponent on the procedures regarding the examination of the doctoral thesis and the public defence before the event. The custos sees that the statement of the opponent is written in accordance with the school’s guidelines and that it is submitted to the school on time.

By tradition, a professor who has acted as the supervising professor for the doctoral student, is generally appointed as the custos. Emeritus professors may be appointed to act as the custos if they have acted as the supervising professor for the doctoral student and if they have up-to-date knowledge on the university’s processes regarding examination of the doctoral doctoral thesis and the regulations regarding the public defence.

The public defence announcement is a concise, plain-language description of the thesis, aimed at the general public and media.

To attract media and stakeholders both in Finland and abroad, write your  announcement also in Finnish (or in Swedish), in addition to English. If you need assistance in writing the press release in Finnish, ask help from your research group, colleagues or fellow students or your thesis advisor. Using Google Translate is not recommended.

Submit your announcement text and defence details at least 15 days before the defence to your doctoral programme via Webropol form (see link below). Your School creates an event of your public defence at aalto.fi website under Events. Your annoucement text will be added to the event. You can distribute the link to all interested parties, including research group/department, family, cooperation partners, professional publications etc.

Submit your public defence annoucement here (webropol.com)

Be concise and answer the following questions:

• What was the subject of the study?
• What was the purpose of the study?
• How relevant is the thesis to other research in the field?
• What results were obtained?
  • What was the main result of the study?
  • What new information does the research bring?
• Where and how the information can be applied?
• What kind of conclusions can be drawn from the results?

The press release should not exceed 2500 characters.

After writing the text, ask a friend or family member who doesn't know your field of study to read it - if they don't understand it, modify accordingly. Try to think of what is especially interesting for the wider public. How can you contextualise your thesis with current affairs or general knowledge?

The official public display is arranged as online display for 10 days before the defence (weekends are included in the required 10 days). In case of article thesis, this means that both the summary and the published and unpublished articles are publicly accessible online. The PDF document including all the unpublished texts will be available for Aalto users on aalto.fi; for external users permission must be sought by email from [email protected] on the grounds of the publicity of official documents.

Link to the online display of the thesis is included in the public defence announcement. Both must be available to public for at least 10 days before the defence.

In some Schools the printed thesis is also physically displayed at the School premises. Check below under "Distribution of thesis" if this is relevant in your School.

Online display of Aalto doctoral theses (aaltodoc.aalto.fi)

Please note that all doctoral theses published at Aalto University are public documents and are also available at Aalto University's open access repository Aaltodoc indefinately, which is not the same as the online public display.

Both the online display and placing the thesis as available via Aaltodoc are handled by the Learning Services staff after you have approved your thesis for publishing at the Aalto Publication platform.

The doctoral programme receives four copies of the published thesis. These include copies for the opponent, custos (and supervising professor) and your Department. The doctoral education services takes care of distributing these copies.

The doctoral thesis is displayed online.

The doctoral student can give copies of the doctoral thesis to the pre-examiners and advisor(s) of the copies that they have received for personal use.

The School of Business pays for 21 copies of the doctoral thesis, which includes the compulsory free copies for libraries, 15 free copies for you. If you wish to have more copies to yourself ask Unigrafia or other printing house for an offer for printing the extra copies.'

It is recommended to send a copy of your thesis + accompanying letter to foundations which have awarded grants to you.

In the morning of the public examination, deliver the remaining department’s copies of the doctoral thesis (+ possible printed lectio praecursoria) to the information desk to be delivered as door handouts outside the public examination hall.

You are also welcome to distrubute your thesis to your friends and family (with signature)

The minimum number of order is 16+6 copies. 6 of these copies should be delivered to National library. Please check if this is done by the printing house, otherwise it is in the doctoral student's responsibility to deliver the copies. Submit 6 copies of the printed thesis to the doctoral programme, at latest 12 days before the defence. Doctoral programme will send copies to opponent, pre-examiners and Aalto library. Please contact Study Coordinator well in advance and notify when your thesis books will be delivered to doctoral programme office (Kemistintie 1, room C202b).

The minimum number of printed theses in the School of Electrical Engineering is 22 copies: 16 to the School and 6 to the National Library of Finland. Your department will pay these copies.The printing house takes care of sending the copies to the National Library of Finland (More information about the Legal Deposit Service.), but the student is responsible for the other distribution. The printing house delivers the books to only certain addresses at Aalto University, from where you can pick them up and take care of the distribution. In the School of Electrical Engineering, the books are mostly delivered to Maarintie 8.

Distribution on responsibility of the doctoral student:

1. Final pdf to the opponent
2. Printed copies as follows:

*Maarintie 8, PO Box 15500, 00076 AALTO

The thesis and the separate publications or works constituting the thesis shall be available at the school for at least ten (10) days before the public defence (Degree Regulations of the School of Engineering). Once the doctoral thesis has been published, 16 copies of it shall be given to the school, and 6 more copies should be delivered to the National Library of Finland. This means that the minimum number of books to be ordered is 22 copies.

The whole printed doctoral thesis (including articles/essays, in article and essay doctoral thesis), shall be publicly displayed in the School of Engineering for at least ten (10) days prior to the defence.

The public display is arranged as online display. Online display means that both the summary and the published and unpublished articles/essays are possible to be publicly accessed online for 10 days. The PDF document including all the unpublished texts will be available for Aalto users on aalto.fi; for external use a permission must be sought by email from [email protected] on the grounds of the publicity of official documents.

Timetable

Please note that the online public display of your doctoral thesis will start 10 days prior the public defence. For the online display, the Learning Centre will need the final electronic version of your doctoral thesis processed by the printing house. Please note that processing the final electronic version of your doctoral thesis requires time in the printing house, so please place your order in the publication platform well in advance.

Aaltodoc

The online public display is different from electronic publishing of the doctoral thesis at Aaltodoc. The staff at Learning Centre will take care of online public display, as well as electronic publishing at Aaltodoc, after receiving the pdf/a file from the printing house. The URN link of your electronic doctoral thesis is based on the ISBN number. The link will be activated after the doctoral thesis has been uploaded into Aaltodoc; this will happen only a day or two before the online public display starts. You will get an automatic email message when your doctoral thesis is available at Aaltodoc.

Order your printed books in one of the addresses listed here.

The minimum number of printed doctoral theses in the School of Science is 16 copies, and 6 more copies should be delivered to the National Library of Finland. This means that minimum number of books to be ordered is 22 copies. This is also the amount paid by each department.

Please check below the guidelines of your department regarding the distribution. Please note that the Doctoral Programme does not send the doctoral thesis to the opponent, the responsibility is of the doctoral student!

Important! Students in every department should deliver one printed book to the Doctoral education services, more details below.
 

Department of Industrial Engineering and Management

Departments of Applied Physics / Neuroscience and Biomedical Engineering / Mathematics and Systems Analysis

Department of Computer Science