Difference between revisions of "Checklist Scientific Paper"
From its-wiki.no
Josef.Noll (Talk | contribs) (Created page with "= Checklist Scientific Paper = Define on forehand a semantic, and be consistent in your wording * approach ''or'' a methodology * analysis ''or'' an evaluation Specifics * c...") |
Seraj.Fayyad (Talk | contribs) (→Checklist Scientific Paper) |
||
| (3 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
= Checklist Scientific Paper = | = Checklist Scientific Paper = | ||
| + | Before writing, create a table of content (TOC) | ||
| + | * define a red line: ''what is the major story of your paper, what do you want to demonstrate/show?'' | ||
| + | * split that into sections | ||
| + | * put under each section/subsection a list of bullets on what to write | ||
| + | * Recommendation: use comment option in LaTeX to indicate the content, e.g. ''% analysis of first example, use only metrics for a and b'' | ||
Define on forehand a semantic, and be consistent in your wording | Define on forehand a semantic, and be consistent in your wording | ||
* approach ''or'' a methodology | * approach ''or'' a methodology | ||
* analysis ''or'' an evaluation | * analysis ''or'' an evaluation | ||
| + | |||
| + | Define a clear baseline/starting point of your approach | ||
| + | * what do we have today?, e.g. multi-metrics approach | ||
| + | * what are the deficiencies? - e.g. ''we are missing a complete system description'' | ||
| + | * comparison state-of-the-art in research | ||
| + | * what am I supposed to add? - e.g. ''complete system description. still some simplifications'' | ||
Specifics | Specifics | ||
| Line 10: | Line 21: | ||
** simple constructions, use only 1 object with max 1 attribute, e.g. ''contributes to an extended approach'' | ** simple constructions, use only 1 object with max 1 attribute, e.g. ''contributes to an extended approach'' | ||
** avoid ''this''. Wherever you use this, reflect on whether it is "crystal clear" or leaves doubt. Use rather: ''The approach ...'' | ** avoid ''this''. Wherever you use this, reflect on whether it is "crystal clear" or leaves doubt. Use rather: ''The approach ...'' | ||
| + | ** tables, figures need to have different captions. | ||
| + | ** every time when you use «this», make sure that you really refer to one thing. Otherwise, repeat rather the subject than use «this». | ||
| + | ** make yourself a list of relations, e.g. «evaluation of two components are equal» %incorrect: result of an evaluation of two components lead to the same ... | ||
| + | ** check that you reduce the number of objects in a sentence. a verb relates to one object, having in maximum one adjective. | ||
| + | e.g. system components interconnection graph -> an interconnection graph for system components | ||
| + | |||
Evaluations | Evaluations | ||
| Line 20: | Line 37: | ||
* start with a very short summary of what was performed | * start with a very short summary of what was performed | ||
* use numbers, be specific | * use numbers, be specific | ||
| + | * pick up on what you wanted to show/demonstrate | ||
| + | * conclusion is a : a) summary, b) facts | ||
| + | |||
== References == | == References == | ||
Latest revision as of 08:35, 16 October 2015
| Wiki for ITS | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
Checklist Scientific Paper
Before writing, create a table of content (TOC)
- define a red line: what is the major story of your paper, what do you want to demonstrate/show?
- split that into sections
- put under each section/subsection a list of bullets on what to write
- Recommendation: use comment option in LaTeX to indicate the content, e.g. % analysis of first example, use only metrics for a and b
Define on forehand a semantic, and be consistent in your wording
- approach or a methodology
- analysis or an evaluation
Define a clear baseline/starting point of your approach
- what do we have today?, e.g. multi-metrics approach
- what are the deficiencies? - e.g. we are missing a complete system description
- comparison state-of-the-art in research
- what am I supposed to add? - e.g. complete system description. still some simplifications
Specifics
- check each sentence:
- does the verb reflect the right relation to the object, e.g.
- simple constructions, use only 1 object with max 1 attribute, e.g. contributes to an extended approach
- avoid this. Wherever you use this, reflect on whether it is "crystal clear" or leaves doubt. Use rather: The approach ...
- tables, figures need to have different captions.
- every time when you use «this», make sure that you really refer to one thing. Otherwise, repeat rather the subject than use «this».
- make yourself a list of relations, e.g. «evaluation of two components are equal» %incorrect: result of an evaluation of two components lead to the same ...
- check that you reduce the number of objects in a sentence. a verb relates to one object, having in maximum one adjective.
e.g. system components interconnection graph -> an interconnection graph for system components
Evaluations
- evaluate your approach with respect to e.g.
- sensitivity (what changes if I change an input value)
- cost/benefit analysis - there is no such thing as a free lunch
- after the analysis, are there lessons learned, things you would have made differently?
Conclusions
- start with a very short summary of what was performed
- use numbers, be specific
- pick up on what you wanted to show/demonstrate
- conclusion is a : a) summary, b) facts
