I have done many MSc/PhD examinations, and I enjoy them so much.

With PhD
thesis' I especially like seeing the face of the candidate when I take the thesis out
of my bag, and you can't see the thesis for Post-it notes. This should hopefully
show that I've read single word in it, and, hopefully, understood most of it. 

So here's my top Ten 25 hints on how to help your examiner (many of these
should also be relevant to MSc thesis' too - to a student aiming at a 1st class Hons
dissertation):

1. Say up-front what the problem is, what other people have
done, and how you have added to it. The Introduction
chapter is the most important chapter of all, and you need to
grab the reader, and tell them what the problem is, and how
you have solved it. If the examiner understands the thesis
after the Introduction, you are half way there. I've read a few
thesis' where I had no idea what the point was until I actually
got to the end, and the contribution was revealed on the last
page. This is a major gamble, as some readers may give up
before that point, and not know the end contribution. Be fair
on the reader and tell them the contribution, and keep telling
them.
2. Get rid of those typos! You wouldn't believe the number of
PhD thesis' I have read that have a typo in the very first line
of the thesis. A reader becomes annoyed if they have to keep
correcting typos, and the more annoyed the reader, the more
time they are taking away from actually reading the content.
Try and start off on a good footing, so that the Abstract and
Introduction chapter have been read over several times -
typically talking them out loud. If possible get someone else
to read the Introduction, and see if they understand what the
point of work is.
3. Bad grammar shows bad practice and a weak
supervision. Part of doing a PhD is learning how to write
and present ideas, and how to review and edit. One of the
most important things that you learn in a PhD is how to write,
so that others can understand your ideas. A good part of this
is for supervisors to get involved reading the work, and in
 giving detailed feedback. It is often a good idea for
supervisors to mark up early drafts with red pen, so
that students get an idea on the amount of checking and
editing that is often required.
4. Superlatives are not very good! A PhD is a scientific study,
and the usage of superlatives should be avoided, along with
weak words like "big" ... "the measure gives a very big
number". If a number is large, define what large actually
means, as everything is relative.
5. Significance matters. I've read thesis' that draw a graph, and
then gives me values of 10 decimal places, and then to be
told that there is an importance of one thing to another. But is
it significant? If I move from 100.01254632 to 100.1263241,
is that a massive change and why do we need so many
decimal places? Every measurement has an accuracy, and
this should always be included in the presentation of the
values. Examiners want to know the significance of
something, and if it isn't significant, then just tell them.
6. One table tells much more than a whole lot of numbers.
Again I've read so many thesis', where the writer continually
presents a whole series of numbers and graphs, and where
they could all be moved into an appendix, and compiled into
a single table (or graph). A good supervisor should be able to
spot how to collapse lots series of tables into a single one, as
they often have to do it for papers. Many students rely on
drawing graphics for presenting trends whereas tables are
often better, especially in defining changes within the figures
presented. A great tip is to normalise values, and show how
the values vary between each other. Relative values are often
easier to understand than absolute ones - remember too that
most values have units, and that units matter. I've quizzed
many students on whether they are talking about Mbps or
MBps - there's a difference of eight in there!
7. Draw some pictures. There is no place for trivial graphics
and clip art in a PhD thesis, but there is a place for the
 abstraction of complex ideas, especially in the introduction.
There no real need to just copy the graphics from others, as
they should come from the ideas inspired by the writer. I've
read quite a few thesis, where the text just goes on and on.
Break the text up every now and then, and give the reader
something to ponder over. 
8. Break up and but keep a narrative. There's a careful
balance here. If you keep your sections short, it becomes to
"bitty", and if you make them too long, they become long and
unwieldy. I personally read whole sections in a single sitting,
and try and take in the ideas, and I won't move on until I
understand it. A long section, especially where there are no
sub-sections, often introduces too many concepts which can
make it difficult to read. I normally recommend a maximum
of a page and a half of text before there should be a break
(such as a sub-section break). Long paragraphs are not a good
thing as it becomes difficult to take in all the concepts
introduced. Try, if possible, not to make them too short, but
not too long. A paragraph that goes on for half a page is
probably too long, and one that has only two sentences is
probably too short. Along try and avoid too many sub-sub
sections, as it becomes difficult for the reader to put it all into
context.
9. Avoid using the words of others too much. A thesis is
written by the writer, and it is their words. A long series of
indented text items of quoted material becomes fairly
generic, where you get little of the sense of the thoughts of
the writer. If you must reference others, pull it out, and
indent.
10. Be precise. A PhD thesis should be a scientific
document which abides to certain standards for the
articulation of ideas. It is always sloppy to see a candidate
writing 9*6^3, where the "*" is a sloppy way of writing a
multiply symbol (x) and ^ should be "to the power off". If it's
an equation, it should be pulled out of the text, and a proper
 equation editor should be used, with a proper numbering
system for the equation.
11. Every diagram and table should be referenced in the
text. I have read many thesis' (typically drafts) where the
writer just assumes that the reader knows how a diagram or
table should integrate with the narrative. Every figure and
table should thus be referenced in the text, so that the reader
knows when to look at it. If possible don't break up your
narrative with a diagram, and move it a little later on, as long
as it is after then text which is referring to it. Don't every put
a diagram in the text before it is actually referred to, as the
reader is left confused as to why the diagram is there.
12. Be critical of yourself and others. One of the key
things within a PhD is the ability to critically appraise the
work of others, both for the strengths and weaknesses of their
work, and also of the candidate's work. I often circle the first
signs of critical thought in a thesis. If it happens on Page 50,
there's a problem in not being able to critically appraise
work. Along with this some candidates can think that
everything is perfect with their work, and that it addresses
every single problem in their field. Try to always define both
the strengths and weaknesses your own work, and identify
how these could be improved. The scope of the impact
should never be overestimated, but also not underestimated.
If you've developed something that completely changed
something, be up-front and tell the reader. Most of the times,
be honest to say that you are just enhancing something a little
bit.
13. A thesis is not a diary! I have read so many thesis'
which are basically just a chronological flow of their
research. You can often spot this as the literature review runs
out of references which are up-to-date. I have read several
thesis' where the latest reference in the literature review is
two years ago, and it points to the fact that it has not been
updated since it was initially written. A literature review
 should be written for the thesis, and many parts of the
original literature can be dumped, and replaced with newer
references which fit in with the contribution.
14. Focus the literature review on the contribution. One
literature review of PhD thesis I read was almost 200 pages
long, and my head was spinning at the end of it. It covered so
many points, and few of them actually went anywhere in the
following chapters. Try and focus the literature review on
covering the 4 or 5 key concepts involved in the thesis, and
not in the research project. A good supervisor can often
spot redundant sections, and advise for them to be cut. If the
thesis is still the same by taking something out, there's no
need for it to be there, as every paragraph and every word
should count, and be carefully crafted as part of the whole
story.
15. Make sure the aim is "of the thesis, and not "of the
initial research project". Many thesis' start with "The aim of
this research project is ..." which often is a sign that the
original project aim has not changed in the writing of the
thesis. Overall the aim is the aim of the thesis, as the research
project has finished. Every should be written from a point-of-
view that the work has finished, and this is the write-up.
16. Get the flow right. A strong flow of literature, method,
build and evaluation helps the flow of the thesis, and where
you often see references to literature tailing off as the thesis
develops. I've seen some thesis' where there are whole
chapters that lack any form of reference to other work. This
is poor practice as a PhD thesis should show how every
aspect of the work fits in with the work of others. I like to see
a reference to other work in the introduction of a chapter, as
it shows some key influences for the work. I personally don't
like an introduction that says "Section 1 says this, and
Section 2 says that, and Section 3 says something else", as I
can see from the table of contents what the contents are. If
possible the reader should tell the reader what is likely to be
 revealed and what the significance is. A re-enforcement of
the main drive of the work also helps to bring the focus onto
the main contribution of the work.
17. If you don't know it ... don't say it! This one seems so
obvious, but you won't believe the number of times that you
ask in a Viva about the detail of a paper, and the method
used, and for the answer to be that they don't actually know
what it does. You always increase your exposure to probing
if you include things you don't quite understand, so dump
them (if they are not a core topic). 
18. Explain it simply. There's nothing nicer for an
examiner when the candidate takes a complex idea and gives
their own viewpoint on it, in a simple way, using new
material. It shows that they can articulate complex ideas in a
simple way. The standard test for any thesis is that a 14-year
old child should, at least, be able to read it, and understand
some of the key concepts in it.
19. Show that you love the subject and that it is
relevant. Three years is a long time, but the sustainment of
interest is a key part of the work, so try and show that this is
an important topic and that your thesis is exactly what is
required, and in the impact that it could have. Again the
Introduction chapter is a great place to grab the reader, and
show how important the work is. If possible try and find
something that has just happened in the news in the
introduction that shows how important your work is. The
Introduction chapter, at least, should be readable by all, and
where, at the end of it, most readers would want to read on,
as it sounds so interesting.
20. Make your thesis a sandwich. With a good thesis, we
open with the Introduction and close on the Conclusions. The
bit in-between justifies what you have opened with and the
conclusions should show what you have uncovered to justify
your argument. The same goes for each chapter, where the
introduction (half a page, typically) shows what you're going
 to tell them, and the conclusion confirms it. Do not make
conclusion into a summary, as the reader has no time to read
summaries, and just wants you to conclude the most
important things that go forward (and so they can dump all
the other things that you covered). If possible say why you
are not taking some things forward in the conclusions (and
justify using the work of others, if possible). 
21. Don't just pick without reviewing and justifying.
There is no justification in a thesis for picking something just
because it is easy to get. If possible all the things that are
selected have at least been reviewed, and a sensible solution
is selected (and justified). Try always to select a few
competing methods and tools and put them against each
other.
22. Validate before Evaluate. You won't believe the
number of Vivas that I've done where I've asked if they
validated their system or software before they went onto
evaluating it. So "How do you it takes 5 milliseconds to get
from here to there?, the wrong answer is "... because the
package said it was 5milliseconds". Good experimenters will
do "fag packet" calculations, to estimate things and know the
limits of what they expect. I always like to see validation
tests within the test data, so that the researcher knows that
their system is working correctly. There's nothing work in
finding there is a bug in your results, after you have
published them ... so always have a sanity check.
23. Get that scientific method. There are so many
occasions in a thesis where you have no idea what a graph is
telling you, as the axis' are not numbered properly, or where
they are poorly scaled. If the variation is between 990 and
1000, don't draw a graph which goes from 0 to 1000. Work
out what the graph is trying to say, and pick the graph type
(eg pie chart to show significant of one method against
another) to show this.
 24. Must be based on a method and be repeatable. There
must be a method in the processes used, and designed in a
scientific way. Along with this the thesis should outline the
procedure in a repeatable way, so that someone else can
perform the same evaluation and get the same results. So
candidates should always say to themselves... "Is there
enough information for someone to build the artefact?", "Is
there enough information to repeat the experiment?", and
"Do I have the data that the examiner can look at, in order to
verify the evaluation?"
25. Evaluate your method against others. The standard
method to show a contribution is to take your method and
evaluate it against other competing methods. The best
approach is to use the best competing method and show an
improvement. This can sometimes be difficult, so, at least,
there is an evaluation against other methods. Showing an
improvement is obviously a good thing, but there is often
nothing wrong with an evaluation which shows a negative
impact, especially if it is backed-up with a strong critical
appraisal.
Oh, I stuck to 25, but there's a few more:

1. Be fair and honest with your experiments. Often an

experimental procedure is selected to benefit your own
method. If possible be fair on all the methods and do not bias
your approach to your one. It does no harm to show
weaknesses and downsides to your own contribution, as it
gives you a chance to critically appraise and show how future
work could improve things. Your experimental procedure
and the associated data collection should be repeatable and
verifiable, so don't delete that data you have gathered.
2. If possible, know your examination team. While the thesis
should stand-alone you should also know your examination
team before the Viva, so avoid patronising them with
 background theory which they know inside-out, or provide
some background which might help the examiners to
understand the area. Often an examiner, as part of the Viva,
will give advice on moving things between the core material
and appendices, in order to address the target audience for the
thesis.
3. Show that you are now an expert in your area. People
expect those with a PhD to be an expert in the area of study,
so make sure you know your core principles in the subject
area. If you are doing a cryptography PhD read around the
subject, and know the core principles of the most important
methods. For me, anyone doing a PhD in electrical
engineering, for example, should know Ohms Law, and the
same should go for other subjects.
4. Use appendices. Many PhD thesis' are full of material that is
irrelevant to many of the key arguments, and writers are often
too sensitive about removing material. If you can, put
unrelated material in an appendix, and just refer to it. As a
measure, if any material doesn't help your core arguments,
then remove it, as you are wasting the reader's time.
5. Quality is better than quantity. Some of the best thesis' I
read have been relatively short and sharp, but where the
quality is high. A good eye for moving material in
appendices is important and helps the examiner. For some
reason, candidates like to produce a thick thesis, and they
think that the more pages there, the better the material. This
is often the opposite, and a thesis written with self-contained
papers for chapters - which link together - are often the best
in their presentation.
6. Define published work. A key part of PhD study is the
dissemination of the work, especially with peer reviewed.
The examiner often needs to know what has been published.
7. Watch those unreliable references. In a PhD thesis, the
references should be credible and verifiable references, and
 references to industry-focused white papers or general Web
pages cannot be trusted providing credible viewpoints.
8. Look for small-scale to large-scale experiments. A good
researcher will often start small scale and prove the principle,
and then look for a large-scale experiment. The sign of small
experiments, along with a large-scale experiment which
properly evaluates the methods presented, is a good sign of a
strong research ethos.
9. Leave the Introduction and Conclusions to last, and then
do the Abstract, and finally the title. You will know the
full scope of you work once you have done the main
chapters, so leave the Introduction and Conclusions to the
end, and writing them together, with an opening statement
and a concluding answer. The abstract then distills the whole
of the thesis and pick a title that then reflect this (and that you
are happy with).
10. Few abstracts are actually any good in first draft.
For some reason most PhD students struggle to write an
abstract, and often it is written more as an introduction rather
than a distilled version of the thesis. Remember that the
abstract is the first thing that the reader reads, so if it is not
focused on presenting the whole of the thesis, you have
missed an opportunity to get the reader on your side. If
possible an abstract should be a page in length, and outline
the problem, the contribution, the most significant methods,
the thing that has been designed/modelled, what has been
evaluated, and what the most significant result is.
11. Conclusions should conclude the whole thesis. Often
the thesis just verifies aims and shows the significance of the
results, but it should also recap the key parts of the literature
and the other chapters.
12. Mind those commas. Commas seem to be a dying
breed, but are there to help speak directly to the reader. Try
and read out loud, and if there's a slight pause, add a comma.
13. End on a high! Don't spoil your thesis, by adding
another chapter after the main contribution. Leave the reader
on a high, and get them into the Conclusions, and leave the
stage. I've read a few thesis' where the last chapter is a real
let-down, and contributes very little to the overall focus of
the work. If you want, put your lovely new models in an
appendix, and refer them in the main chapters, but try and
finish the main chapters with the answer to the question
posed at the start. The last dot of the last main chapter
cements the argument, so don't run on into something else
that you just happens to be which you are currently looking
at, as just feel your thesis isn't thick enough yet!
14. Sign post your work. Remember the thicker the thesis,
the longer it takes to read, and if it doesn't get to the point,
the more annoyed the reader becomes in actually showing
how you have addressed the problem and your main
contribition. The more focused the thesis, the shorter time it
will take to understand it, and the happier the examiner will
be when they are reading it. Add pointers to "wake up" the
reader and tell them that they really should read this bit ... as
I'm telling you something important.
15. Guide but stay on the academic track. Guide them
through difficult areas, and allow them to learn from your
love of the topic and your new insights, but stick to well-
defined academic principles for writing a thesis ... such as not
adding your own opinions in literature review parts. Leave
your thoughts for the conclusion section with a chapter. Try
not to hint that you've solved every problem in the area, and
rely on showing your contribution on the back of others,
including within the main conclusions.
16. Be humble. Show that you are humble in your writing
and respect (and know) the most important people in your
area (including your external examiner), and that you want to
be an active part of your community, and help them. The
PhD is not an end-stop, but shows how you will work in the
 future ... either in academia or industry. So just because you
are off to a job in industry, doesn't mean that your research
career ends at the graduation ... you have standards and
methods to set for others to follow.
In the Viva:

1. Be ready to defend, up to a point. You are unlikely to ever

win with a debate with the External Examiner, as they
typically have the experience to know when they are right.
The Examiner does want to see you putting up arguments
against theirs, and not bend. A strategy is often to debate the
case, and try different routes of explanation, but then to take
on their advice for any changes that would be required.
2. Draw it out and keep it simple. Drawing diagrams and
abstracting is a great way to explain your ideas, so wherever
possible try to draw an abstraction to show a key point. Try
not to over complex things, as they examiner is often looking
for you to article complex ideas in a simple and
understandable way.
3. The simplest things are often the most difficult to explain.
Many candidates go into a Viva thinking they will get probed
on the complex areas of their work, but end up having to
justify an extremely simple concept, that they have taken for
granted. An examiner can often spot a weakness in some
fundamental areas and probe around that, in order to see how
the candidate thinks through a problem. So candidates should
also try and be well versed on the fundamentals areas,
especially when it involves maths.
4. Know your examiners. Every examiner is different, and
they have their own style. Some go from page to page, others
read generally around significant parts of the work. They will
generally have expertise in certain areas, so try and
understand their motivations in their research, and some of
 their specialities, as they are likely to draw on these for
questions.
5. Don't leave it too long for the Viva. The best time for a
Viva is straight after you've written your thesis, so try and
don't leave it too long for the Viva, as you will forget a few
things.
6. Stay calm and enjoy. It is your opportunity to lock horns
with an expert in their field, so enjoy it, as you'll probably
never have the chance to do something like this in your
career.
7. Be humble. See above!

Conclusions
A PhD is a long road, and you learn along that road. The end result should setup
you up for the even longer road ahead, but you now have all the tools to be ready
for a career in research. None of us truly knows the formula for a successful PhD,
but the methods applied by examiners and supervisors have stood the test of time,
and do actually result in something that can contribute to the body of science.
Remember that you are:

Standing on the shoulders of giants

a key thing is knowing who's shoulders you are standing on, and help the others
who could stand on your shoulders. Enjoy your time!

And finally...
For a bit of advice, have a look at Ralph Merkle's time. He invented key exchange
while an undergraduate, but his professor rejected his ideas because he didn't
articulate them properly, and Ralph then tried to publish a paper on it, but it was
rejected because he had no literature in the paper [here].

So, try and write well ... and perfect the art of speaking directly to the reader, and
also follow the rules of research that have been laid down over the centuries, and
you are half way there.