Examiner-Proofing and Defence Strategy

How do I find the weaknesses in my thesis before my examiner does?

Read it in the examiner's order, which is usually abstract, introduction, conclusion, methodology, findings, then literature, and adopt an explicit hostile persona rather than merely intending to be critical. Mark every claim you would not accept, every choice you would question, every place you would ask how you know that, and every place you were not convinced. Do not fix anything while reading. A good thesis generates thirty to sixty marks; a low count usually means the persona was not adopted.

Should I hide a weakness in my thesis?

No. Owning a limitation explicitly, at the point where it matters, with its consequence carried through into the conclusions, removes it as an attack surface. An examiner who finds a weakness the thesis already states properly has nothing to do with it, while one who finds a concealed weakness has found two problems.

How do I answer a viva question I cannot answer?

Do not bluff, because an examiner asking about a specific literature usually knows it well and a fabricated familiarity is exposed in one follow-up. Acknowledge it directly, say what you do know, and say how you would expect it to bear on your work. "I don't know, and here is how I would find out" is a competent answer and far stronger than a confident wrong one.

Is it bad to concede a point in a viva?

The opposite. Conceding a real point well demonstrates the judgement being examined. The structure is: accept the point specifically, state its actual scope accurately, and state what stands regardless. The two failure modes are denying an obvious problem, which destroys credibility for everything else, and over-conceding, which gives away the thesis because one criticism was right.

How do I prepare if I know who my examiners are?

Read their recent relevant work and identify what positions they hold that your thesis bears on, what methods they favour, and what they have criticised in others. Check that their relevant work is cited and cited accurately, since a misrepresented citation to an examiner's own paper is an avoidable and memorable failure. Contradicting an examiner is entirely acceptable provided you have engaged their argument at its strongest and can concede its merits before disagreeing.

What is the right way to respond to thesis corrections?

One row per correction: the correction as written, what was done, and where in the revised thesis it now appears with a page reference. Address every point including the minor ones, because an unaddressed correction is what triggers a second round. Where you disagree, argue it with evidence and offer a partial accommodation where possible, and keep the tone neutral throughout.