1. Writing for CS and CE Research Paper
CSCE 481
Fall 2016
Dr. Scott Schaefer
Acknowledgment – Prof. John Keyser & Aakash Tyagi

2. Specific Writing
We will discuss some specifics for writing research papers.
This is commonly done in graduate school.
Material developed for graduate students
But, many principles carry forward to other writing
Other topics:
Proposals
Technical documents (E.g. Algorithm description)
Executive summaries

3. Sections of a Research Paper
Title (Executive Summary, Proposal, Algorithm Description)
Abstract
Introduction (Executive Summary, Proposal, Algorithm Description)
Previous Work (Executive Summary, Proposal)
Possibly including background information
Main Work (ideas/theory/exposition) (Algorithm Description)
Possibly in several sections
Implementation
If needed
Results
Possibly combined into main work section
Conclusion (Executive Summary, Proposal, Algorithm Description)
With future work
Acknowledgements
References (Executive Summary, Proposal, Algorithm Description)
Appendices

4. Title Don’t underestimate title importance
Memorable titles can help people remember the paper
The title will be used for searching, later
Remove unnecessary words
Watch for misleading words

5. Introduction Motivation and Summary
By the end of the introduction, someone should be able to tell someone else what you did, and why.
But probably not give any details about how
Keep the introduction short, relative to the rest of the paper.

6. Motivation
Early on in the paper, you must make the case for why you are doing this
This should not be too long
If you have to spend too long to say why someone should read the paper, then there’s probably not a good reason
The motivation is not why you are writing the paper, it’s just there to get people to read it
Sometimes this is more important than other times – sometimes motivation is obvious

7. Summarizing Main Results
You want to make it clear what the main results of your paper are.
Don’t “hide” them or make them a “surprise” at the end
Remember, most people will not read your full paper – you still want them to know the main results
Should always be in the abstract
Should be in the introduction of the paper
Main Results, Contributions, Thesis Statement
Can be in the conclusion

8. A “Main Results” Section
Could be a subsection, a paragraph, a bulleted list, or a sentence
Should be easy to find/locate
Should make clear what is the new, unique contribution of this work
It is not a summary of everything you’ve done, or even a summary of the paper
Just list the key point(s) that are new to your work.

9. The Thesis Statment
A short statement that summarizes what the focus of the paper is
Can help to focus your writing, presentation, and research
The goal of the paper is to show why the thesis statement is important and true (or false…)

10. Previous Work Section Provide references to relevant material
What are the key papers that someone should read to understand this?
What are the most relevant related papers/alternatives?
Demonstrate that you are familiar with the main research in the area
Ensure you cite all the relevant work
Especially the papers of those who will read yours…
Can’t cite everything; cite the most important things
Usually, citations to textbooks aren’t needed
Unless that textbook provides a unique derivation, a particular summary, etc.

11. Previous Work Section
If necessary provide background summary of prior work
For example, if you are building on your own prior work
Make sure that prior work is separated from new work
You want to clearly delineate what is new vs. what is old.
When giving citations to previous work, it is good to show how your work fits in with that prior work.

12. The New Work This is the main, core part of your paper
It should be the part that you are most confident in, and have the most to say about
It is important that you are clear and accurate.

13. Things to Look Out For
You are not just presenting a list of what you did.
Every piece of research has lots of “infrastructure” work that goes on behind it – you don’t need to go into this, unless it is critical
You don’t need to discuss “dead end paths” that you pursued
One exception is if it is very likely someone else would follow that dead end path
You research is evaluated on results, not process.

14. Things to Look Out For You want to develop your material clearly
Usually, someone will read this section in order
Don’t pull ideas/material from nowhere
Make sure that information is presented in a logical order
Think of it as telling a (technical) story:
Keep the story moving
Don’t refer to things that the reader has no knowledge of
Make sure the reader understands what has happened!

15. Things to Look Out For Avoid tangential topics
Make the section about the main results, not the interesting “side” items
Use appendices if necessary
Make sure there is a clear overview
Avoid going directly into details if the person doesn’t have the overall picture
Often, overview sections or figures are helpful

16. Results
You want to demonstrate all of the core ideas that you discussed in practice
If you discussed something, show the results
Idea is to show that what you presented works, and give some sense of how well it works
Pick good test cases, that cover a range of situations
Ones that allow comparison
Ones that allow evaluation of parts of your technique
Ones that simulate “real world” cases
You need to provide comparisons to other work, whenever possible
This lets people evaluate your work

17. Conclusion
Now that we have seen the work in the paper, what can we conclude?
What has been the “contribution” of this work?
What insights does this work offer?
What does this now allow us to do?
Conclusion should not be just a summary of what was in the paper – that is obvious.

18. Future Work Usually part of the conclusion
Not always included, but a good idea if possible
People want to know that the paper is not a “dead end”
What more could be done? If I like this area, what could I work on next?
Is this likely to stimulate future work?
Can be a “defense” against reviewers.

19. Future Work Avoid using “throwaway” future work
In computer science, you can always say you want to improve performance, port to a new system, or integrate with something else.
Better to have one or two solid areas for future work than 10 that aren’t developed.
Don’t just state areas, give some indication of the challenges/opportunities
Why will that be worthwhile?
What are some obstacles that will be faced in that extension?

20. General Comments on Research Paper Writing

21. Shorter is Better Don’t use many words when fewer will do
Worse: The function utilizes a looping structure to iterate over the list while analyzing whether or not one element is larger than the next.
Better: The function checks if the list is sorted.

22. Avoid Indefinite Pronouns
Don’t use unqualified pronouns… particularly “it” and “this”
Worse: The source code produced an error due to the input. Therefore, it was re- written.
Better: The source code produced an error due to the input. Therefore, the input was re-written.

23. Active Voice Avoid passive voice
Worse: The source code was a mess. So the code was rewritten.
Better: The source code was a mess. So John rewrote the code.

24. Audience Make sure you are writing to the appropriate audience
Usually, this is to other researchers in the field
Not to novices – they will know the basics of the field
Not necessarily to just the foremost experts in the area – they will not be familiar with every bit of prior work
Not to experts in all areas – they may not be familiar with simpler concepts from other fields
Some papers (e.g. literature reviews) are for more general, less expert, audiences

25. Audience Give them the background they need to understand the paper
Particularly if you rely on another technique; don’t make them read other papers before they can read yours
Not always possible – sometimes there is too much to do
Notation might not be standardized
Explain the notation as needed
The concepts might already be known

26. Overstating/Understating
Do not oversell your work
Do not promise more than you deliver
Do not try to make your work have more impact than it reasonably does
You probably have a higher opinion of your work than others do or ever will.
Readers are annoyed if they spend their time reading your article, only to find it didn’t do what was promised.

27. Overstating/Understating
Do not undersell your work
Don’t put in so many disclaimers that you discourage someone from reading/following it
Point out problems, especially key ones, but:
Your goal is not to point out every conceivable flaw
If necessary, point out why problems might not be so bad
You are writing the paper because you have something new to present, that others should find valuable.

28. Overcoming Objections
Those reading the paper will often have questions/objections.
You want to answer/address these in the paper
This is key to getting the paper accepted through review, but also for getting the paper accepted after publication

29. Overcoming Objections
Think: “If I were a reviewer, what would I have questions about?”
Find a way to address those directly
If they are technical concerns and you have not addressed them in the work, show that you’ve thought about them
What examples should be included?
What tests should be provided?

30. Figures and Captions
People will usually look at figures before they read the text
You want the figures to stand on their own as much as possible
Be sure that your captions clearly describe what is in the figure. Do not rely on the text to describe the figure.

31. Comparisons to Prior Work
Always a tricky proposition
Your goal in the paper is to show how good your work is. You have spent a great deal of time on your own approach.
You must be fair to prior work, but you probably can’t devote as much effort to replicating it.
If standardized comparisons can be made, use them
If you implement another method for comparison, be sure to do your best with it
If not, be sure to clearly state what you did not do, and why.

32. Comparisons to Prior Work
It is not OK to just present your material and assume it should be accepted
That does not show any new contribution over the state of the art
Exception: if it is truly the first time someone has accomplished something
If you cannot provide comparisons, at least provide concise, clear arguments that evaluate your method vs. other methods.

33. Feedback If possible, get someone else to read your work
They should be willing to give direct, honest feedback
Take their evaluations to heart
When reviewers reply with objections, don’t blame the reviewer
If the reviewer didn’t understand it, it’s probably your fault
Make sure that you address their concerns
Sometimes it is only a style/writing issue!
Sometimes they have found more fundamental flaws
Even these can sometimes be addressed by writing differently.
There are (very rare) exceptions where reviewers are way off
Always be polite and respectful in your responses, anyway

34. Sections of a Research Paper
Title (Executive Summary, Proposal, Algorithm Description)
Abstract
Introduction (Executive Summary, Proposal, Algorithm Description)
Previous Work (Executive Summary, Proposal)
Possibly including background information
Main Work (ideas/theory/exposition) (Algorithm Description)
Possibly in several sections
Implementation
If needed
Results
Possibly combined into main work section
Conclusion (Executive Summary, Proposal, Algorithm Description)
With future work
Acknowledgements
References (Executive Summary, Proposal, Algorithm Description)
Appendices

35. Textbook Guidance Chapters 5 – 8, for general technical writing
There may still be overlap, but this will be a good guide.
Chapter
Executive Summary
Algorithm Description
Proposal
Chapter 2
Getting Started (Research Planning)
Chapter 3
Reading and Reviewing
(Literature Review)
Chapter 4
Hypothesis, Questions, & Evidence
Chapter 10
Algorithms
Chapter 11
Graphs, Figures, & Tables