Survey
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
The Scientific Paper Types, structure and logic There is no one way to write a paper Paper types: Research reports Reviews Progress reports Hypothesis articles ??? ALL have a role to play Some papers are short and concise (2.5 pages in Nature) Small World Networks Some papers are long and rambling Some papers are just weird Nature, 15 January 2014 Some papers aren't research papers at all, but essays offering valuable perspective Why don't YOU write one!! BUT... all papers have structure Long, short, research, review, all papers have: 1. An introduction (first or several paragraphs) 2. Description of methods and results (several paragraphs to many pages) 3. Discussion of the relationship of this work to previous work, and potential implications 4. A short conclusion This stereotyped structure – AGAIN! -- helps avoid confusion by meeting the reader's expectations. Methods and Results These sections should: State very clearly what you've done and how you've done it, with enough detail so that other scientists could, in principle, reproduce your results. Journal of Colloids and Interfaces: “Provide sufficient detail to allow the work to be reproduced” Be complete – trust your judgement!! Discussion If it's not introduction, methods, references, ... then it's probably “discussion”! Don't hold back – this is your opportunity. Just remain within the frame of your overall argument Key Points: 1. Have you established some specific result? Almost established it, yet with caveats? What are they? 2. Do your findings contradict/support earlier studies? Some of both? 3. Why should the reader care? What are the implications? Can your method be extended? Have you raised surprising questions? 4. Are there key shortcomings of method, data, assumptions. How might they be overcome? 5. Conjectures? How to demonstrate? Introduction This section should do several things: 1. Describe the background or problem in more detail than the abstract; introduce! 2. Describe briefly what you've done that is new, how you've attacked the problem, preparing the reader to move to the methods 3. Tease the reader, promise a later pay-off with a taste of the results to come. In Good Health? Thank Your 100 Trillion Bacteria By GINA KOLATA (13 June, 2012) For years, bacteria have had a bad name. They are the cause of infections, of diseases. They are something to be scrubbed away, things to be avoided. … No one really knew much about them. … what do they look like in healthy people, and how much do they vary from person to person? … the Human Microbiome Project… sequenced the genetic material of bacteria taken from nearly 250 healthy people.... They discovered more strains than they had ever imagined — as many as a thousand strains on each person. And each person’s collection of microbes, the microbiome, was different from the next person’s. To the scientists’ surprise, they also found genetic signatures of disease-causing bacteria lurking in everyone’s microbiome. But instead of making people ill, or even infectious, these diseasecausing microbes simply live peacefully among their neighbors. The “teaser” paragraph Introduction This section should do several things: 1. Describe the background or problem in more detail than the abstract; introduce! 2. Describe briefly what you've done that is new, how you've attacked the problem, preparing the reader to move to the methods 3. Tease the reader, promise a later pay-off with a taste of the results to come. This section should introduce the WHOLE PAPER and promise the reader a pay-off if they keep reading. A good introduction... ..... PNAS, 9 September 2008 Background, of course... ..... Brief detail on methods, of course... ..... AND some results/conclusions... ..... Another effective introduction ..... First paragraph 1. Introduction ..... Recent investigations have uncovered large, consistent deviations from the predictions of the textbook presentation of Homo economicus. One problem appears to lie in economists' assumption that individuals are entirely self-interested; in addition to their own material payoffs, many experimental subjects appear to care about fairness and reciprocity... Second paragraph Fundamental questions remain unanswered. Are the deviations from the canonical model evidence of ..... universal patterns of behaviour, or do the individuals' economic and social environments shape behaviour?... Third paragraph Existing research cannot answer such questions because virtually all subjects have ..... been university students. ... To address the above questions, we and our collaborators undertook a large cross-cultural study... in twelve countries on four continents... Fourth paragraph We can summarize our results as follows. First, the canonical model is not ..... supported in any society studied. Second, there is considerably more behavioural variability across groups than had been found in previous cross-cultural research and... Comparably, not so good... ..... Nature, 3 September 2009 Background, yes... But not even a hint about results/conclusions... ..... This is a missed opportunity Are these divisions fixed and inflexible? NO!! Only one fixed rule: ANYTHING goes as long as it works to your advantage in getting your points across Constructing a working draft: An exercise Using topic sentences to your advantage Writing has a fractal nature It's all parts within parts Write as you would build a house First, construct (outline) the main structure Then elaborate each main structure into key parts Then elaborate those parts into smaller parts Continue down to the level of sentences Write as you would build a house First, construct (outline) the main structure Then elaborate each main structure into key parts Then elaborate those parts into smaller parts Continue down to the level of sentences Expect the initial result to be horrifically ugly!! Outlining the entire paper Introduction Para.1 para.2 .. Description of methods/work Results Discussion Conclusion Acknowledgements References Introduction 1. Topic sentence [notes on what to put here] 2. Topic sentence [notes on what to put here] etc Methods 1. Topic sentence [notes on what to put here] etc For example: Introduction P1. The Vlasov-Poisson equations describe plasma physics in the so-called “collisionless” regime. [Add details of background and history]. P2. Smith and Rogers recently discovered new solutions to these equations by exploiting advances in non-linear mathematics. [Add detail; what advances? What solutions?] P3. Here we show how this new class of solutions can be extended by using symplectic methods. [Add detail; how and to what effect?] Methods P1. Symplectic methods allow... [Add detail on ...]