cpe 626 writing scholarly papers

Download CPE 626  Writing Scholarly Papers

Post on 12-Feb-2016




0 download

Embed Size (px)


CPE 626 Writing Scholarly Papers. Aleksandar Milenkovic E-mail: milenka@ece.uah.edu Web: http://www.ece.uah.edu/~milenka. Why Are We Bothering?. Useful for writing your final report. Useful to know the style for doing future research. This is how academics communicate - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • CPE 626 Writing Scholarly PapersAleksandar MilenkovicE-mail: milenka@ece.uah.eduWeb:http://www.ece.uah.edu/~milenka

  • Why Are We Bothering?Useful for writing your final report.

    Useful to know the style for doing future research.

    This is how academics communicateYou should know the techniqueProven over time

  • SourcesStephen A. Edwards lecture slideshttp://www.cs.columbia.edu/~sedwards/Veljko MilutinovicV. Milutinovic, The Best Method for Presentation of Research Results, IEEE TCCA Newsletter, Sep. 1996. http://tab.computer.org/tcca/NEWS/sept96/bestmeth.pdf

  • Research PapersClear statement of the problem being addressedWhat has been done before and what is newProposed solutionResults achieved

    Literature survey should have included the first twoFinal report should include all four

  • Typical OutlineAbstractIntroductionRelated WorkDescription of problem solutionExperimental resultsConclusions and future workBibliography

  • The AbstractShort2-3 paragraphs100-150 words

    Introduce problem in first paragraphDescribe your approach in secondBrief conclusions and impact in third

    Abstract must stand alone as pure EnglishNo bibliographic citationsNo mathematics

  • A Sample AbstractImprovement of the branch predictors has been one of focal points in the computer architecture research during the last decade, from two-level predictors to the use of genetic algorithms. The most of the research efforts try to use the real, already implemented, branch predictor sizes and organization for comparison and evaluation. Yet, a little is known about exact predictor implementation in Intel processors, apart from a few size hints in the Intel manuals and a valuable but unverified hacker efforts. On the other hand, Intel processors include performance monitoring counters that can count the events related to branches, and Intel provides a powerful VTune Performance Analyzer enabling the easy access to performance counters. In this paper, we propose a series of simple experiments that explore the organization and size of a branch predictor, and use it to investigate Pentium III and Pentium 4 predictor implementations. Experiments showed that BTB has 4 ways in both implementations. PIII predictor has just the local history component, while P4 has both global and local history components. Such knowledge could be used in further predictor research, as well as in the design of new, architecture-ware compilers.

  • The IntroductionDescribe both the area youre working on and what youve foundCut to the chase early My field is interesting and heres what Ive done

    Dont repeat the abstract

    Orient the readers about what they should expectSome references are appropriate here, but they need not be exhaustive

  • Related WorkDescribe the relevant work of othersYou wont be exactly duplicating their work, so contrast your results with theirs

    Be respectful to authors:Smith [1] describes a system for real-time scheduling

    Dont use citations as nouns:In [1], a system for real-time scheduling is described

  • Goals of the Related Work SectionOrient the readerPart of your job is to figure out the state of the field and communicate that clearlyThey need to know how your work is a huge step forward from what youve done

    Convince the reader you are knowledgeableAcademics work by consensusTheres an accepted body of knowledgeYours wont be added to it unless you understand and acknowledge it, too

  • BibliographyMany different styles that differ only slightlyAll have the same goal of providing enough information so that a reader can find what you read

    Information in most citations:Author(s) of the workTitle of the workWhere it appeared (if a conference or journal publication)Date (at least year) at which it appeared

  • Example Bibliographic EntriesA paper in a conference

    [1] A. Milenkovic, V. Milutinovic, "Cache Injection: A Novel Technique for Tolerating Memory Latency in Bus-Based SMPs," Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 1900, Proceedings of the 6th International Euro-Par Conference, Munich, Germany, August/September 2000, pp. 558-566.

    Authors names, Title, Conference title, Conference Location, Month 20xx, pp. xx-yy.

  • Example Bibliographic EntriesA book

    [2] M. J. Smith, Application-Specific Integrated Circuits, Addison-Wesley, New York, 1997.

    Author, Title, Publisher, 19xx.

  • Example Bibliographic EntriesA journal paper

    [1] A. Milenkovic, "Achieving High Performance in Bus-Based Shared Memory Multiprocessors," IEEE Concurrency, Vol. 8, No. 3, July-September 2000, pp. 36-44.

    Author(s), Title, Journal, Vol. x, No. y, month, 20xx, pp. xx-yy.

  • Example Bibliographic EntriesA technical manual

    [1] M. D. Smith, Energy-efficient cache memories, Phd Thesis, University of Alabama in Huntsville, 2001.

    Author(s). Title, Organization, 20xx.

  • Citing Web PagesURLs are not generally considered reasonable scholarly citationsNot peer-reviewedVery fragileCan easily be changed

    Best used for pointing people to projects or companies

  • The BodyDescribe what youve done with reasonable detail

    Make sure to describe any unexpected or particularly difficult problemsGoal is to simplify life for those in the future

    Describe what you did and how it turned out

    No requirement to include everythingThanks, but thats a little more information than I needed to know.

  • Clear WritingBe conciseThis is the main goalThink of it as an engineering problem:How can I communicate using the fewest words?

    Be emphaticAvoid passive constructions

  • Clear WritingAvoid wordy idiomsInstead ofPrefermake assumptionassumeis a function ofdepends onis an illustration ofillustrates

    Avoid inactive verbsAvoid writing to beNot In Smith, a clear-cut distinction was made Instead Smith made a clear-cut distinction

  • Clear WritingStart each paragraph with a topic sentence:

    You will be amazed by how much this helps. People will sing your praises. Professors will grade you higher. Your peers will call you The Exalted One. Little children will bow in your presence.

    Technical writing is not a murder mystery:Explain whodunit immediatelySuspense is not the point

  • That vs. WhichRestrictive clauses use thatAdded to constraint the number of different things being consideredDont need commas

    Buildings that have white walls are common here.

    Nonrestrictive clauses use whichAdded to give additional information without changing collection being consideredNeed commas

    Stucco buildings, which have white walls, are common here.

  • Experimental ResultsInclude important results that actually show somethingAvoid including endless tables or graphs if they dont further your point

    Clearly label and explain how to interpret your graphWhat are you measuring?What are you controlling?What is your experimental setup?

  • Experimental ResultsDont do this:

  • Experimental ResultsGraphs often illustrate trends and behaviors much more clearly than tablesConsider using graphics where you canOften much more succinct

  • Conclusion SectionHere, summarize the results, say what worked and what didnt, and explain what remains to be done

    Be careful not to save the best for lastIve read many papers where the contents of the conclusions section should have been written in the introductionThis is not a murder mystery

  • Paper FormatMost conferences and workshops require a common format

    Two columns10 pointUsually Times RomanSingle-spaced

    Paper is precious: dont waste it