Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

--- public:rem4:rem4-16:abstract [2016/08/22 15:36] – created thorisson2
+++ public:rem4:rem4-16:abstract [2024/04/29 13:33] (current) – external edit 127.0.0.1
@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
+[[public:sc-t-701-rem4-18-1:rem4-18-lecturenotes|<-BACK to REM4-18 MAIN]]
+----------
 ===== Abstracts =====
@@ Line 5: / Line 8: @@
 ===Structure of Abstracts===
-| //Each item below should take only 1-2 sentences in your abstract// | (unless otherwise noted)  |
+|  //Each item below should take only 1-2 sentences in your abstract//  | (unless otherwise noted)  |
-| Outer context | A short introduction to the **field** or **context** of the research problem addressed. This places the research topic within the larger scientific context. Go for "the shortest introduction possible". |
+|  Outer context  | A short introduction to the **field** or **context** of the research problem addressed. This places the research topic within the larger scientific context. Go for "the shortest introduction possible". |
-| Research problem / question | A short introduction to the research problem. Explain the problem you are addressing, in as simple words as possible. Make sure you describe it at the right level of detail. Not too general - then you are repeating the above point; not too specific - then you leave out some context that is necessary for some of your readership. "The shortest introduction possible" (4 sentences at most). |
+|  Research problem / question  | A short introduction to the research problem. Explain the problem you are addressing, in as simple words as possible. Make sure you describe it at the right level of detail. Not too general - then you are repeating the above point; not too specific - then you leave out some context that is necessary for some of your readership. "The shortest introduction possible" (max 4 sentences). |
-| Key Motivation | 1 line on why this work was worth doing. (Make sure the justification is scientific, not personal!) |
+|  Key Motivation  | Why this work was worth doing. 1 sentence. Make sure the justification is scientific (not personal!).  |
-| Prior attempts at addressing it | If someone has addressed it directly, add 1 or 2 lines about this as well. |
+|  Prior attempts at addressing it  | How has this issue been addressed before?  |
-| Why prior attempts are not enough |  |
+|  Why prior attempts are not enough  | How do prior attempts fail at addressing the issue?  |
-| Method | How did you do perform this work? (4 sentences at most). |
+|  Method  | How did you do perform this work? (max 4 sentences at most). |
-| Results | What were your results? (4 sentences at most). |
+|  Results  | What were your results? (max 4 sentences). |
-| (Conclusion) | Sometimes done to emphasize the **main message** or conclusion of the work described in the paper. |
+|  (Conclusion)  | Sometimes done to emphasize the **main message** or conclusion of the work described in the paper. |
 \\
@@ Line 22: / Line 25: @@
 ===General Guidelines===
-| Keep it simple! | No one ever faulted a scientific paper for being too easy to read or having too simple wording or sentence structure, if all that matters is already in there.  |
+|  Keep it simple!  | No one ever faulted a scientific paper for being too easy to read or having too simple wording or sentence structure, if all that matters is already in there.   |
-| Keep it concise | The abstract is the most polished part, wording wise, of scientific papers. |
+|  Keep it concise  | The abstract is the most polished part, wording wise, of scientific papers.  |
-| As simple as possible but not simpler | Make sure it's easy to read but says everything. |
+|  As simple as possible but not simpler  | Make sure it's easy to read but says everything.  |
 \\
 \\