Bibliography

Every work cited anywhere in this repository, once. The text cites Author Year; the key column matches it.

Key Citation Link
ACL 2023 ACL 2023 organisers (2023). ACL 2023 policy on AI writing assistance (updated 10 January 2023). Organiser page, the venue's own rule https://2023.aclweb.org/blog/ACL-2023-policy/
Ad Hoc Working Group 1987 Ad Hoc Working Group for Critical Appraisal of the Medical Literature (1987). A proposal for more informative abstracts of clinical articles. Annals of Internal Medicine 106(4) https://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-106-4-598
Ahmed 2023 Ahmed, Wahed, Thompson (2023). The growing influence of industry in AI research. Science 379(6635), 884-886 https://doi.org/10.1126/science.ade2420
Alcock 2015 Alcock, Hodds, Roy, Inglis (2015). Investigating and improving undergraduate proof comprehension. Notices of the AMS 62(7), 742-752 https://doi.org/10.1090/noti1263
AMS 2017 American Mathematical Society (2017). AMS Author Handbook: Journal Classes https://ctan.org/pkg/amscls-doc
Army 2020 Headquarters, Department of the Army (2020). Army Regulation 25-50, Preparing and Managing Correspondence, 10 October 2020, effective 10 November 2020. Regulation, the owner's own rule https://armypubs.army.mil/epubs/DR_pubs/DR_a/ARN42124-AR_25-50-007-WEB-13.pdf
arXiv 2025 arXiv (2025). Updated practice for review articles and position papers in the arXiv CS category. Platform blog post of 31 October 2025 https://blog.arxiv.org/2025/10/31/attention-authors-updated-practice-for-review-articles-and-position-papers-in-arxiv-cs-category/
arXiv 2026 arXiv (undated, read 2026). Metadata for required and optional fields (preparing a submission) https://info.arxiv.org/help/prep.html
Ashurst 2022 Ashurst, Hine, Sedille, Carlier (2022). AI ethics statements: analysis and lessons learnt from NeurIPS broader impact statements. ACM FAccT 2022, 2047-2056 https://doi.org/10.1145/3531146.3533780
Atkinson 1999 Atkinson (1999). Scientific Discourse in Sociohistorical Context: The Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, 1675-1975. Lawrence Erlbaum https://doi.org/10.4324/9781410601704
Babic 2019 Babic, Capes-Davis, Martone, Bairoch, Ozyurt, Gillespie, Bandrowski (2019). Incidences of problematic cell lines are lower in papers that use RRIDs to identify cell lines. eLife 8 https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.41676
Back 2010 Back (2010). Structured derivations: a unified proof style for teaching mathematics. Formal Aspects of Computing 22(5), 629-661 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00165-009-0136-5
Bayer 2022 Bayer, Benzmüller, Buzzard, David, Lamport, Matiyasevich, Paulson, Schleicher, Stock, Zelmanov (2022). Mathematical proof between generations https://arxiv.org/abs/2207.04779
Bazerman 1988 Bazerman (1988). Shaping Written Knowledge: The Genre and Activity of the Experimental Article in Science. University of Wisconsin Press https://wac.colostate.edu/books/landmarks/bazerman-shaping/
Bhavsar 2025 Bhavsar, Duffy, Jo, Lokker, Haynes, Iorio, Marusic, Ng (2025). Policies on artificial intelligence chatbots among academic publishers: a cross-sectional audit. Research Integrity and Peer Review 10, 1 https://doi.org/10.1186/s41073-025-00158-y
Blanco 2019 Blanco, Altman, Moher, Boutron, Kirkham, Cobo (2019). Scoping review on interventions to improve adherence to reporting guidelines in health research. BMJ Open 9(5), e026589 https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2018-026589
Bodnar 2018 Bodnar, Kadlowec (2018). Initial validation of a technical writing rubric for engineering design. International Journal of Engineering Pedagogy 8(1), 81-91 https://doi.org/10.3991/ijep.v8i1.7728
Bommasani 2023 Bommasani, Klyman, Longpre, Kapoor, Maslej, Xiong, Zhang, Liang (2023). The Foundation Model Transparency Index https://arxiv.org/abs/2310.12941
Bommasani 2024 Bommasani, Klyman, Kapoor, Longpre, Xiong, Maslej, Liang (2024). The 2024 Foundation Model Transparency Index. Transactions on Machine Learning Research (12/2024) https://arxiv.org/abs/2407.12929
Booth 1997 Booth, O'Rourke (1997). The value of structured abstracts in information retrieval from MEDLINE. Health Libraries Review 14(3) https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2532.1997.1430157.x
Bourke 2013 Bourke, Holbrook (2013). Examining PhD and research masters theses. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 38(4), 407-416 https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2011.638738
Boutron 2010 Boutron, Dutton, Ravaud, Altman (2010). Reporting and interpretation of randomized controlled trials with statistically nonsignificant results for primary outcomes. JAMA 303(20) https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2010.651
Boyd 2021 Boyd (2021). Datasheets for datasets help ML engineers notice and understand ethical issues in training data. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction 5(CSCW2), 1-27 https://doi.org/10.1145/3479582
Bredbenner 2019 Bredbenner, Simon (2019). Video abstracts and plain language summaries are more effective than graphical abstracts and published abstracts. PLOS ONE 14(11) https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0224697
Bridge 1984 Bridge, Belmore, Moskow, Cohen, Matthews (1984). Topicalization and memory for main ideas in prose. Journal of Reading Behavior 16(1), 61-80 https://doi.org/10.1080/10862968409547504
Britt 2003 Britt, Larson (2003). Constructing representations of arguments. Journal of Memory and Language 48(4), 794-810 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0749-596X(03)00002-0
Brown 2023 Brown, Wettstein, Hacker (2023). Rubric development for technical reports in chemical engineering unit operations laboratory courses. ASEE Annual Conference, paper 37907 https://par.nsf.gov/biblio/10437367
BTS 2010 Académie de Grenoble (2010). BTS Analyses de biologie médicale, annexe 6, fiche d'évaluation de la soutenance de rapport de stage. Grid, the académie's own rule; example of practice only https://sti-biotechnologies-pedagogie.web.ac-grenoble.fr/sites/default/files/Media/document/btsabm-stage5_grille_evaluation_soutenance_rapport_stage_2010.pdf
Buckheit 1995 Buckheit, Donoho (1995). WaveLab and reproducible research. In Wavelets and Statistics, Lecture Notes in Statistics 103 https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4612-2544-7_5
Budgen 2008 Budgen, Kitchenham, Charters, Turner, Brereton, Linkman (2008). Presenting software engineering results using structured abstracts: a randomised experiment. Empirical Software Engineering 13(4) https://doi.org/10.1007/s10664-008-9075-7
Buljan 2018 Buljan, Malički, Wager, Puljak, Hren, Kellie, West, Alfirević, Marušić (2018). No difference in knowledge obtained from infographic or plain language summary of a Cochrane systematic review: three randomized controlled trials. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 97, 86-94 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2017.12.003
Bunton 2005 Bunton (2005). The structure of PhD conclusion chapters. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 4(3), 207-224 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2005.03.004
Carter 2008 Carter (2008). Examining the doctoral thesis: a discussion. Innovations in Education and Teaching International 45(4), 365-374. Cited through Golding 2014; read in full 2026-10-29 https://doi.org/10.1080/14703290802377208
Chambers 2013 Chambers (2013). Registered Reports: a new publishing initiative at Cortex. Cortex 49(3) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cortex.2012.12.016
Chambers 2022 Chambers, Tzavella (2022). The past, present and future of Registered Reports. Nature Human Behaviour 6(1) https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-021-01193-7
Chapman 2019 Chapman, Grossman, FitzPatrick, Brady (2019). Randomized controlled trial of plain English and visual abstracts for disseminating surgical research via social media. British Journal of Surgery 106(12) https://doi.org/10.1002/bjs.11307
Chetcuti 2022 Chetcuti, Cacciottolo, Vella (2022). What do examiners look for in a PhD thesis? Explicit and implicit criteria used by examiners across disciplines. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 47(8), 1358-1373 https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2022.2048293
Coakley 2026 Coakley, Snelleman, Hoos, Gundersen (2026). The shift toward open and reproducible AI research. arXiv preprint, abstract read, not peer reviewed https://arxiv.org/abs/2606.16974
Cohn 2026 Cohn (undated, read 2026). Advice for amateur mathematicians on writing and publishing papers https://cohn.mit.edu/advice
Collberg 2016 Collberg, Proebsting (2016). Repeatability in computer systems research. Communications of the ACM 59(3), 62-69 https://doi.org/10.1145/2812803
COS 2019 Center for Open Science (2019). Journals test the Materials Design Analysis Reporting (MDAR) checklist. Organiser blog post of 22 October 2019, the working group's own account of its pilot https://www.cos.io/blog/journals-test-materials-design-analysis-reporting-mdar-checklist
COS 2024 Center for Open Science (2024). New preprint introduces major update to the TOP Guidelines. Organiser blog post of 18 September 2024, the standard-setter's own account https://www.cos.io/blog/new-preprint-introduces-major-update-to-the-top-guidelines
Danchev 2021 Danchev, Min, Borghi, Baiocchi, Ioannidis (2021). Evaluation of data sharing after implementation of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors data sharing statement requirement. JAMA Network Open 4(1), e2033972 https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.33972
Davey 1990 Davey, Miller (1990). Topicalization and the processing of expository prose by children: mediating effects of cognitive styles and content familiarity. Educational Psychology 10(1), 23-38 https://doi.org/10.1080/0144341900100103
Davies 2020 Davies, Alcock, Jones (2020). Comparative judgement, proof summaries and proof comprehension. Educational Studies in Mathematics 105(2), 181-197 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-020-09984-x
Davies 2021 Davies, Jones (2021). Assessing proof reading comprehension using summaries. International Journal of Research in Undergraduate Mathematics Education 8, 469-489 (cited only for a statement made in a search summary: secondary) https://doi.org/10.1007/s40753-021-00157-6
De Millo 1979 De Millo, Lipton, Perlis (1979). Social processes and proofs of theorems and programs. Communications of the ACM 22(5), 271-280 https://doi.org/10.1145/359104.359106
Dijkstra 1990 Dijkstra, Scholten (1990). Predicate Calculus and Program Semantics. Springer https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4612-3228-5
Dijkstra 2000 Dijkstra (2000). EWD1300: The notational conventions I adopted, and why https://www.cs.utexas.edu/~EWD/transcriptions/EWD13xx/EWD1300.html
Distill 2021 Distill Editorial Team (2021). Distill hiatus. Distill 6 https://doi.org/10.23915/distill.00031
Dodge 2019 Dodge, Gururangan, Card, Schwartz, Smith (2019). Show your work: improved reporting of experimental results. EMNLP 2019, 2185-2194 https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/D19-1224
Dreyfus 1999 Dreyfus (1999). Why Johnny can't prove. Educational Studies in Mathematics 38, 85-109 https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1003660018579
eLife 2017 eLife (2017). Plain-language summaries: results of the 2016 eLife digest reader survey. Publisher page, the journal's own survey https://elifesciences.org/inside-elife/19c97b89/plain-language-summaries-results-of-the-2016-elife-digest-reader-survey
eLife 2020 eLife (2020). Welcome to a new era of reproducible publishing (the Executable Research Article). eLife Labs https://elifesciences.org/labs/dc5acbde/welcome-to-a-new-era-of-reproducible-publishing
Elsevier GA 2026 Elsevier (undated, read 2026). Graphical abstract. Publisher author-resources page, the owner's own rule https://www.elsevier.com/authors/journal-authors/graphical-abstract
Elsevier KRT 2026 Elsevier (undated, read 2026). STAR methods: key resources table. Publisher author-resources page, the owner's claim about its own format https://www.elsevier.com/authors/author-resources/key-resources-table
EMS 2026 EMS Press (undated, read 2026). Author guidelines https://ems.press/author-guidelines
EOST 2026 École et Observatoire des Sciences de la Terre, Université de Strasbourg (undated, read 2026). Modalités de soutenance et guide de rédaction du rapport de stage. School guide, the school's own rule https://eost.unistra.fr/websites/eost/eost/Formation/Ecole/Cursus/Soutenance_rapport_de_stage.pdf
Evanko 2025 Evanko, Jordan (2025). Automated targeted e-mails for improving author compliance with study reporting requirements and other editorial processes. Peer Review Congress abstract; the authors work for the publisher whose journals it studies https://peerreviewcongress.org/abstract/automated-targeted-e-mails-for-improving-author-compliance-with-study-reporting-requirements-and-other-editorial-processes
Findley 2016 Findley, Jensen, Malesky, Pepinsky (2016). Can results-free review reduce publication bias? The results and implications of a pilot study. Comparative Political Studies 49(13) https://doi.org/10.1177/0010414016655539
Frankston 2024 Frankston, Godfrey, Brinn, Hofer, Nazzaro (2024). HTML papers on arXiv: why it is important, and how we made it happen https://arxiv.org/abs/2402.08954
Fuller 2014 Fuller, Weber, Mejía-Ramos, Rhoads, Samkoff (2014). Comprehending structured proofs. JIEEM 7(1). https://openalex.org/W2184046398
Gabelica 2022 Gabelica, Bojčić, Puljak (2022). Many researchers were not compliant with their published data sharing statement: a mixed-methods study. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 150, 33-41 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2022.05.019
Gainey 2022 Gainey, Smith, McCaffery, Clifford, Muscat (2022). What author instructions do health journals provide for writing plain language summaries? A scoping review. The Patient 16(1), 31-42. Counts read in the abstract https://doi.org/10.1007/s40271-022-00606-7
Galipeau 2015 Galipeau, Moher, Campbell, Hendry, Cameron, Palepu, Hébert (2015). A systematic review highlights a knowledge gap regarding the effectiveness of health-related training programs in journalology. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 68(3), 257-265. Abstract only seen, results not read https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2014.09.024
Ganjavi 2024 Ganjavi, Eppler, Pekcan, Biedermann, Abreu, Collins, Gill, Cacciamani (2024). Publishers' and journals' instructions to authors on use of generative artificial intelligence in academic and scientific publishing: bibliometric analysis. BMJ 384, e077192 https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj-2023-077192
Gardner 2013 Gardner, Nesi (2013). A classification of genre families in university student writing. Applied Linguistics 34(1), 25-52 (online 2012) https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/ams024
Garner 2013 Garner, Alley (2013). How the design of presentation slides affects audience comprehension: a case for the assertion-evidence approach. International Journal of Engineering Education 29(6), 1564-1579 https://www.ijee.ie/articles/Vol29-6/23_ijee2791ns.pdf
Garousi 2019 Garousi, Felderer, Mäntylä (2019). Guidelines for including grey literature and conducting multivocal literature reviews in software engineering. Information and Software Technology 106, 101-121 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infsof.2018.09.006
Gastel 2016 Gastel, Day (2016). How to Write and Publish a Scientific Paper, 8th edition. Greenwood (ABC-CLIO) https://doi.org/10.5040/9798400666926
Gebru 2021 Gebru, Morgenstern, Vecchione, Vaughan, Wallach, Daumé, Crawford (2021). Datasheets for datasets. Communications of the ACM 64(12), 86-92; preprint arXiv:1803.09010 https://doi.org/10.1145/3458723
Georgakopoulos 2023 Georgakopoulos (2023). Writing is not a soft skill. Essay, University of Warwick https://warwick.ac.uk/fac/sci/maths/people/staff/agelos_georgakopoulos/writingmathadvise.pdf
Gillman 1987 Gillman (1987). Writing Mathematics Well: A Manual for Authors. Mathematical Association of America (link: review by Lax, 1989) https://doi.org/10.1080/00029890.1989.11972203
GMU 2026 George Mason University Writing Center (undated, read 2026). Scientific (IMRaD) research reports: overview. University writing-advice page; it says its material comes from a Carnegie Mellon cheatsheet https://writingcenter.gmu.edu/guides/writing-an-imrad-report
Gnewuch 2025 Gnewuch, Wahle, Ruas (2025). Big Tech-funded AI papers have higher citation impact, greater insularity, and larger recency bias. Preprint, not peer reviewed https://arxiv.org/abs/2512.05714
Goldberg 2024 Goldberg, Ullah, Khuong, Rachmat, et al. (2024). Usefulness of LLMs as an author checklist assistant for scientific papers: NeurIPS'24 experiment. Preprint https://arxiv.org/abs/2411.03417
Golding 2014 Golding, Sharmini, Lazarovitch (2014). What examiners do: what thesis students should know. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 39(5), 563-576 (online 2013) https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2013.859230
Gopen 1990 Gopen, Swan (1990). The science of scientific writing. American Scientist, 78(6), 550-558. https://www.jstor.org/stable/29774235
Gowers 2023 Gowers, Green, Manners, Tao (2023). On a conjecture of Marton https://arxiv.org/abs/2311.05762
Grant 2024 Grant, Corker, Mellor, Stewart, and 15 others (2024). TOP 2025: an update to the Transparency and Openness Promotion Guidelines. MetaArXiv preprint. DOI checked, preprint not read; described through COS 2024 https://doi.org/10.31222/osf.io/nmfs6
Graves 2013 Graves, Moghaddasi, Hashim (2013). Mathematics is the method: exploring the macro-organizational structure of research articles in mathematics. Discourse Studies 15(4), 421-438 https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445613482430
Graves 2014 Graves, Moghaddasi, Hashim (2014). "Let G = (V, E) be a graph": turning the abstract into the tangible in introductions in mathematics research articles. English for Specific Purposes 36, 1-11 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2014.03.004
Gries 1993 Gries, Schneider (1993). A Logical Approach to Discrete Math. Springer https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4757-3837-7
Gross 2002 Gross, Harmon, Reidy (2002). Communicating Science: The Scientific Article from the 17th Century to the Present. Oxford University Press https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780195134544.001.0001
Groth 2010 Groth, Gibson, Velterop (2010). The anatomy of a nanopublication. Information Services and Use 30(1-2) https://doi.org/10.3233/ISU-2010-0613
Gundersen 2018 Gundersen, Kjensmo (2018). State of the art: reproducibility in artificial intelligence. AAAI 2018, 32(1) https://doi.org/10.1609/aaai.v32i1.11503
Halmos 1970 Halmos (1970). How to write mathematics. L'Enseignement Mathématique 16, 123-152 https://doi.org/10.5169/seals-43857
Hamilton 2023 Hamilton, Hong, Fraser, Rowhani-Farid, Fidler, Page (2023). Prevalence and predictors of data and code sharing in the medical and health sciences: systematic review with meta-analysis of individual participant data. BMJ 382, e075767 https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj-2023-075767
Hanna 1990 Hanna (1990). Some pedagogical aspects of proof. Interchange 21(1), 6-13 https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01809605
Hanna 2012 Hanna, de Villiers (eds.) (2012). Proof and Proving in Mathematics Education: The 19th ICMI Study. Springer https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-2129-6
Hardwicke 2018 Hardwicke, Mathur, MacDonald, Nilsonne, Banks, Kidwell, et al. (2018). Data availability, reusability, and analytic reproducibility: evaluating the impact of a mandatory open data policy at the journal Cognition. Royal Society Open Science 5(8), 180448 https://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.180448
Hartley 1996 Hartley, Sydes, Blurton (1996). Obtaining information accurately and quickly: are structured abstracts more efficient? Journal of Information Science 22(5) https://doi.org/10.1177/016555159602200503
Hartley 1997 Hartley, Sydes (1997). Are structured abstracts easier to read than traditional ones? Journal of Research in Reading 20(2) https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9817.00025
Hartley 1999 Hartley (1999). From structured abstracts to structured articles: a modest proposal. Journal of Technical Writing and Communication 29(3) https://doi.org/10.2190/3RWW-A579-HC8W-6866
Hartley 2000 Hartley (2000). Are structured abstracts more or less accurate than traditional ones? A study in the psychological literature. Journal of Information Science 26(4) https://doi.org/10.1177/016555150002600408
Hartley 2003 Hartley (2003). Improving the clarity of journal abstracts in psychology: the case for structure. Science Communication 24(3) https://doi.org/10.1177/1075547002250301
Hartley 2004 Hartley (2004). Current findings from research on structured abstracts. Journal of the Medical Library Association 92(3) https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC442180/
Hartley 2014 Hartley (2014). Current findings from research on structured abstracts: an update. Journal of the Medical Library Association 102(3) https://doi.org/10.3163/1536-5050.102.3.002
Haynes 1990 Haynes, Mulrow, Huth, Altman, Gardner (1990). More informative abstracts revisited. Annals of Internal Medicine 113(1) https://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-113-1-69
Herbst 2002 Herbst (2002). Establishing a custom of proving in American school geometry: evolution of the two-column proof. Educational Studies in Mathematics 49(3), 283-312 https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1020264906740
Hermann 2020 Hermann, Winter, Siegmund (2020). Community expectations for research artifacts and evaluation processes. ESEC/FSE 2020, 469-480 https://doi.org/10.1145/3368089.3409767
Heumüller 2020 Heumüller, Nielebock, Krüger, Ortmeier (2020). Publish or perish, but do not forget your software artifacts. Empirical Software Engineering 25(6), 4585-4616 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10664-020-09851-6
Higham 2020 Higham (2020). Handbook of Writing for the Mathematical Sciences, 3rd edition. SIAM https://doi.org/10.1137/1.9781611976106
Hill 1982 Hill, Soppelsa, West (1982). Teaching ESL students to read and write experimental-research papers. TESOL Quarterly 16(3) https://doi.org/10.2307/3586633
Hillier 2016 Hillier, Kelly, Klinger (2016). Narrative style influences citation frequency in climate change science. PLOS ONE 11(12) https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0167983
Hodds 2014 Hodds, Alcock, Inglis (2014). Self-explanation training improves proof comprehension. J. Research in Mathematics Education. https://doi.org/10.5951/jresematheduc.45.1.0062
Hodgson 2020 Hodgson (2020). Helping doctoral students understand PhD thesis examination expectations: a framework and a tool for supervision. Active Learning in Higher Education 21(1), 51-63 (online 2017) https://doi.org/10.1177/1469787417742020
Holbrook 2007 Holbrook, Bourke, Fairbairn, Lovat (2007). Examiner comment on the literature review in Ph.D. theses. Studies in Higher Education 32(3), 337-356 https://doi.org/10.1080/03075070701346899
Holbrook 2008 Holbrook, Bourke, Lovat, Fairbairn (2008). Consistency and inconsistency in PhD thesis examination. Australian Journal of Education 52(1), 36-48. Cited through Golding 2014; read in full 2026-10-29 https://doi.org/10.1177/000494410805200103
Hopewell 2008 Hopewell, Clarke, Moher, Wager, et al. (2008). CONSORT for reporting randomized controlled trials in journal and conference abstracts: explanation and elaboration. PLOS Medicine 5(1) https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.0050020
Hopewell 2025 Hopewell, Chan, Collins, Hróbjartsson, et al. (2025). CONSORT 2025 statement: updated guideline for reporting randomised trials. BMJ 389 https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj-2024-081123
Howitt 2014 Howitt, Wilson (2014). Revisiting "Is the scientific paper a fraud?". EMBO Reports 15(5) https://doi.org/10.1002/embr.201338302
Hubbard 2017 Hubbard, Dunbar (2017). Perceptions of scientific research literature and strategies for reading papers depend on academic career stage. PLOS ONE 12(12) https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0189753
Hyland 2004 Hyland, Tse (2004). Metadiscourse in academic writing: a reappraisal. Applied Linguistics 25(2) https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/25.2.156
Ibrahim 2017 Ibrahim, Lillemoe, Klingensmith, Dimick (2017). Visual abstracts to disseminate research on social media: a prospective, case-control crossover study. Annals of Surgery 266(6) https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0000000000002277
ICLR 2025 ICLR 2026 Program Chairs (2025). ICLR 2026 response to LLM-generated papers and reviews. Organiser blog post of 19 November 2025 https://blog.iclr.cc/2025/11/19/iclr-2026-response-to-llm-generated-papers-and-reviews/
ICMJE 2023 International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (2023). Recommendations: artificial intelligence (AI)-assisted technology, use by authors. Standards body page, text read in its 2026 edition; the May 2023 date is from secondary sources https://www.icmje.org/recommendations/browse/artificial-intelligence/ai-use-by-authors.html
ICMJE 2026 International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (undated, read 2026). Recommendations: preparing a manuscript for submission to a medical journal. Standards body page https://www.icmje.org/recommendations/browse/manuscript-preparation/preparing-for-submission.html
ICML 2023 ICML 2023 organisers (2023). Clarification on large language model policy. Organiser page, the venue's own rule https://icml.cc/Conferences/2023/llm-policy
ICML 2026a ICML 2026 organisers (undated, read 2026). LLM policy. Organiser page, the venue's own rule https://icml.cc/Conferences/2026/LLM-Policy
ICML 2026b ICML 2026 organisers (2026). On violations of LLM review policies. Organiser blog post of 18 March 2026, updated 26 March https://blog.icml.cc/2026/03/18/
Ilmavirta 2015 Ilmavirta (2015). When to postpone a proof? MathOverflow question 211409 and its answers https://mathoverflow.net/questions/211409
Inglis 2012 Inglis, Alcock (2012). Expert and novice approaches to reading mathematical proofs. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education 43(4), 358-390 https://doi.org/10.5951/jresematheduc.43.4.0358
Inglis 2013a Inglis, Alcock (2013). Skimming: a response to Weber and Mejía-Ramos. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education 44(2), 472-474 https://doi.org/10.5951/jresematheduc.44.2.0472
Inglis 2013b Inglis, Mejia-Ramos, Weber, Alcock (2013). On mathematicians' different standards when evaluating elementary proofs. Topics in Cognitive Science 5(2), 270-282 https://doi.org/10.1111/tops.12019
INSPE 2021 INSPE de l'académie de Grenoble (2021). Grille d'évaluation de l'écrit du mémoire de master 1 MEEF second degré, 2020-21. Owner's grid https://m1-meef-nsi.gricad-pages.univ-grenoble-alpes.fr/rech701/M1-grille_evaluation_memoire-2020-21_et_oral.pdf
ISO 1986 ISO (1986, confirmed 2024 per the catalogue). ISO 7144:1986 Documentation, presentation of theses and similar documents. Catalogue record; full text paywalled https://www.iso.org/standard/13736.html
Jaffe 1993 Jaffe, Quinn (1993). "Theoretical mathematics": toward a cultural synthesis of mathematics and theoretical physics. Bulletin of the AMS 29(1), 1-13 https://doi.org/10.1090/S0273-0979-1993-00413-0
Jansen 2010 Jansen, Janssen (2010; prints in 2011). Explanations first: a case for presenting explanations before the decision in Dutch bad-news messages. Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 25(1), 36-67 https://doi.org/10.1177/1050651910380372
Jansen 2013 Jansen, Janssen (2013). Effects of directness in bad-news e-mails and voice mails. International Journal of Business Communication 50(4), 362-382 https://doi.org/10.1177/0021943613497053
Jelicic Kadic 2016 Jelicic Kadic, Fidahic, Vujcic, Saric, Propadalo, Marelja, Dosenovic, Puljak (2016). Cochrane plain language summaries are highly heterogeneous with low adherence to the standards. BMC Medical Research Methodology 16 https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-016-0162-y
Johnston 1997 Johnston (1997). Examining the examiners: an analysis of examiners' reports on doctoral theses. Studies in Higher Education 22(3), 333-347. Cited through Golding 2014; not read https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079712331380936
Kapoor 2023 Kapoor, Narayanan (2023). Leakage and the reproducibility crisis in machine-learning-based science. Patterns 4(9), 100804 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.patter.2023.100804
Karačić 2019 Karačić, Dondio, Buljan, Hren, Marušić (2019). Languages for different health information readers: multitrait-multimethod content analysis of Cochrane systematic reviews textual summary formats. BMC Medical Research Methodology 19 https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-019-0716-x
Kerr 1998 Kerr (1998). HARKing: hypothesizing after the results are known. Personality and Social Psychology Review 2(3) https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327957pspr0203_4
Keshav 2007 Keshav (2007). How to read a paper. ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review 37(3) https://doi.org/10.1145/1273445.1273458
Kidwell 2016 Kidwell, Lazarević, Baranski, Hardwicke, Piechowski, Falkenberg, et al. (2016). Badges to acknowledge open practices: a simple, low-cost, effective method for increasing transparency. PLOS Biology 14(5), e1002456 https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.1002456
Kieras 1978 Kieras (1978). Good and bad structure in simple paragraphs: effects on apparent theme, reading time, and recall. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 17(1), 13-28 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5371(78)90496-6
Kieras 1980 Kieras (1980). Initial mention as a signal to thematic content in technical passages. Memory & Cognition 8(4), 345-353 https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03198274
Kiley 2004 Kiley, Mullins (2004). Examining the examiners: how inexperienced examiners approach the assessment of research theses. International Journal of Educational Research 41(2), 121-135 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2005.04.009
Kim 2022 Kim, Lee, Yoo, Jung, Kim, Kim (2022). Seeing is believing: the effect of graphical abstracts on citations and social media exposure in gastroenterology and hepatology journals. Journal of Korean Medical Science 37(45) https://doi.org/10.3346/jkms.2022.37.e321
Kim 2026 Kim, Deng, Vaughan, Su, Su, Agarwal, Li, Jaggi, Goldstein, Shah, Dudík (2026). Use and effects of LLMs in peer review: a randomized experiment and survey at ICML 2026. arXiv preprint, abstract read, not peer reviewed; co-authors include the venue's organisers https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.19420
Knuth 1989 Knuth, Larrabee, Roberts (1989). Mathematical Writing. MAA Notes 14 https://www.phys.uconn.edu/~rozman/Courses/P2400_14S/downloads/knuth_mathematical_writing.pdf
Kobak 2025 Kobak, González-Márquez, Horvát, Lause (2025). Delving into LLM-assisted writing in biomedical publications through excess vocabulary. Science Advances 11(27) https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.adt3813
Koetsenruijter 2022 Koetsenruijter, Wronski, Ghosh, Müller, Wensing (2022). The effect of an additional structured methods presentation on decision-makers' reading time and opinions on the helpfulness of the methods in a quantitative report: nonrandomized trial. JMIR Medical Informatics 10(4), e29813 https://doi.org/10.2196/29813
Krantz 2017 Krantz (2017). A Primer of Mathematical Writing, 2nd edition. AMS; preprint arXiv:1612.04888 https://doi.org/10.1090/mbk/112
Krukowski 2023 Krukowski, Goldstein (2023). The potential for graphical abstracts to enhance science communication. Translational Behavioral Medicine 13(12), 891-895. A narrative review https://doi.org/10.1093/tbm/ibad069
Kuteeva 2015 Kuteeva, McGrath (2015). The theoretical research article as a reflection of disciplinary practices: the case of pure mathematics. Applied Linguistics 36(2), 215-235 https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amt042
Lamport 1995 Lamport (1995). How to write a proof. American Mathematical Monthly 102(7), 600-608 https://doi.org/10.1080/00029890.1995.12004627
Lamport 2012 Lamport (2012). How to write a 21st century proof. Journal of Fixed Point Theory and Applications 11(1), 43-63 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11784-012-0071-6
Lee 2005 Lee (2005). Notes on writing mathematics (Math 310 handout 2). University of Washington https://sites.math.washington.edu/~lee/Courses/310-2005/writing-math.pdf
Leron 1983 Leron (1983). Structuring mathematical proofs. American Mathematical Monthly. https://doi.org/10.1080/00029890.1983.11971184
Leron 2013 Leron, Zaslavsky (2013). Generic proving: reflections on scope and method. For the Learning of Mathematics 33(3), 24-30 https://www.jstor.org/stable/43894858
Lessing 2025 Lessing, Ogbonnaya (2025). Reasoning and proof in mathematics education: a systematic literature review. Discover Education 5 https://doi.org/10.1007/s44217-025-01016-1
Lew 2019 Lew, Mejía-Ramos (2019). Linguistic conventions of mathematical proof writing at the undergraduate level. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education 50(2), 121-155 https://doi.org/10.5951/jresematheduc.50.2.0121
Lew 2020 Lew, Weber, Mejía Ramos (2020). Do generic proofs improve proof comprehension? Journal of Educational Research in Mathematics 30(S), 229-248 https://doi.org/10.29275/jerm.2020.08.sp.1.229
Liang 2024b Liang, Rajani, Yang, Ozoani, Wu, Chen, Smith, Zou (2024). Systematic analysis of 32,111 AI model cards characterizes documentation practice in AI. Nature Machine Intelligence 6, 744-753; preprint arXiv:2402.05160 (numbers read in the preprint) https://doi.org/10.1038/s42256-024-00857-z
Liang 2025 Liang, Zhang, Wu, Lepp, Ji, Zhao, et al. (2025). Quantifying large language model usage in scientific papers. Nature Human Behaviour 9, 2599-2609; preprint "Mapping the increasing use of LLMs in scientific papers" arXiv:2404.01268 (numbers read in the preprint) https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-025-02273-8
Lin 2012 Lin, Evans (2012). Structural patterns in empirical research articles: a cross-disciplinary study. English for Specific Purposes 31(3) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2011.10.002
Liu 2020 Liu, Cruz Rivera, Moher, Calvert, Denniston, SPIRIT-AI and CONSORT-AI Working Group (2020). Reporting guidelines for clinical trial reports for interventions involving artificial intelligence: the CONSORT-AI extension. BMJ 370, m3164 https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.m3164
LMS 2021 London Mathematical Society (2021). Submitting to the Journal [of the LMS]: author guide https://www.lms.ac.uk/sites/default/files/inline-files/JLMS%20author%20guide_0.pdf
Loisel 2026 Loisel, Sandoval Lentisco, Ioannidis (2026). Negligible participation in the scientific literature of AI unicorn startups. bioRxiv preprint of 16 July 2026, abstract read, not peer reviewed https://doi.org/10.64898/2026.07.15.738744
Lorch 1996 Lorch, Lorch (1996). Effects of headings on text recall and summarization. Contemporary Educational Psychology 21(3), 261-278 https://doi.org/10.1006/ceps.1996.0022
Macleod 2021 Macleod, Collings, Graf, Kiermer, Mellor, Swaminathan, Sweet, Vinson (2021). The MDAR (Materials Design Analysis Reporting) framework for transparent reporting in the life sciences. PNAS 118(17), e2103238118. DOI checked, paper not read https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2103238118
Magnusson 2023 Magnusson, Smith, Dodge (2023). Reproducibility in NLP: what have we learned from the checklist? Findings of ACL 2023, 12789-12811 https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2023.findings-acl.809
Marcus 2016 Marcus (2016). A STAR is born. Cell 166(5), 1059-1060. Publisher editorial, introduces the publisher's own format https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2016.08.021
Markowitz 2024 Markowitz (2024). From complexity to clarity: how AI enhances perceptions of scientists and the public's understanding of science. PNAS Nexus 3(9) https://doi.org/10.1093/pnasnexus/pgae387
Massot 2026 Massot (undated, read 2026). leanblueprint: a plasTeX plugin and command-line tool for Lean blueprints. GitHub repository https://github.com/PatrickMassot/leanblueprint
mathlib 2020 The mathlib Community (2020). The Lean mathematical library. CPP 2020, 367-381 https://doi.org/10.1145/3372885.3373824
Mathlib 2026 The mathlib community (undated, read 2026). Documentation style (contributor guide) https://leanprover-community.github.io/contribute/doc.html
MathOverflow 2021 Anonymous asker (2021). How to structure a proof by induction in a maths research paper? MathOverflow question 386921 and its answers https://mathoverflow.net/questions/386921
Medawar 1963 Medawar (1963). Is the scientific paper a fraud? The Listener 70. Reprinted in The Strange Case of the Spotted Mice and Other Classic Essays on Science (Oxford University Press, 1996) https://books.google.com/books?vid=ISBN019286193X
Mejia-Ramos 2009 Mejía-Ramos, Inglis (2009). Argumentative and proving activities in mathematics education research. Proceedings of the ICMI Study 19 Conference: Proof and Proving in Mathematics Education, vol. 2, 88-93. Taipei: National Taiwan Normal University, ISBN 978-986-01-8210-1 (announced by ICMI) https://www.mathunion.org/icmi/news-and-events/2009-05-18/icmi-study-19-proceedings-available-online
Mejia-Ramos 2012 Mejia-Ramos, Fuller, Weber, Rhoads, Samkoff (2012). An assessment model for proof comprehension in undergraduate mathematics. Educational Studies in Mathematics 79(1), 3-18 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-011-9349-7
Mejia-Ramos 2014 Mejia-Ramos, Weber (2014). Why and how mathematicians read proofs: further evidence from a survey study. Educational Studies in Mathematics 85(2), 161-173 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-013-9514-2
Mejía-Ramos 2017 Mejía-Ramos, Lew, de la Torre, Weber (2017). Developing and validating proof comprehension tests in undergraduate mathematics. Research in Mathematics Education 19(2), 130-146 https://doi.org/10.1080/14794802.2017.1325776
Mensh 2017 Mensh, Kording (2017). Ten simple rules for structuring papers. PLOS Computational Biology 13(9) https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1005619
Mitchell 2019 Mitchell, Wu, Zaldivar, Barnes, Vasserman, Hutchinson, Spitzer, Raji, Gebru (2019). Model cards for model reporting. ACM FAccT 2019, 220-229 https://doi.org/10.1145/3287560.3287596
Moskovitz 2024 Moskovitz, Harmon, Saha (2024). The structure of scientific writing: an empirical analysis of recent research articles in STEM. Journal of Technical Writing and Communication 54(3) https://doi.org/10.1177/00472816231171851
MSC 2020 zbMATH Open and Mathematical Reviews. Mathematics Subject Classification 2020 https://msc2020.org/
Mullins 2002 Mullins, Kiley (2002). "It's a PhD, not a Nobel Prize": how experienced examiners assess research theses. Studies in Higher Education 27(4), 369-386 https://doi.org/10.1080/0307507022000011507
Nanayakkara 2021 Nanayakkara, Hullman, Diakopoulos (2021). Unpacking the expressed consequences of AI research in broader impact statements. AIES 2021, 795-806 https://doi.org/10.1145/3461702.3462608
Nature 2023 Nature editorial (2023). Tools such as ChatGPT threaten transparent science; here are our ground rules for their use. Nature 613, 612 https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-023-00191-1
Nesi 2012 Nesi, Gardner (2012). Genres across the Disciplines: Student Writing in Higher Education. Cambridge University Press https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009030199
NeurIPS 2021 NeurIPS 2021 organisers (2021). NeurIPS 2021 paper checklist. Organiser page, the venue's own rule https://nips.cc/Conferences/2021/PaperInformation/PaperChecklist
NeurIPS 2025 NeurIPS 2025 organisers (2025). NeurIPS 2025 policy on large language models. Organiser page, undated, the venue's own rule https://neurips.cc/Conferences/2025/LLM
NeurIPS 2026 NeurIPS organisers (2026). NeurIPS 2026 paper checklist guidelines. Organiser page, read 28 October 2026; the page is replaced each year https://neurips.cc/public/guides/PaperChecklist
Nicholas 2007 Nicholas, Huntington, Jamali, Dobrowolski (2007). Characterising and evaluating information seeking behaviour in a digital environment: spotlight on the bouncer. Information Processing and Management 43(4) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ipm.2006.08.007
Nielsen 2006 Nielsen (2006). F-shaped pattern for reading web content. Nielsen Norman Group https://www.nngroup.com/articles/f-shaped-pattern-reading-web-content-discovered/
Nildam 1998 Nildam (1998). News writing style and readers' perception. Master's thesis, Chulalongkorn University https://digital.car.chula.ac.th/chulaetd/22123
NISO 2010 NISO (2010). ANSI/NISO Z39.18-2005 (R2010), Scientific and Technical Reports: Preparation, Presentation, and Preservation. Standards body, reaffirmed 2010 https://www.niso.org/publications/z39.18-2005-r2010
Nosek 2014 Nosek, Lakens (2014). Registered Reports: a method to increase the credibility of published results. Social Psychology 45(3) https://doi.org/10.1027/1864-9335/a000192
Nosek 2015 Nosek, Alter, Banks, Borsboom, and 35 others (2015). Promoting an open research culture. Science 348(6242), 1422-1425. DOI checked, paper not read https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aab2374
Olah 2017 Olah, Carter (2017). Research debt. Distill 2 https://doi.org/10.23915/distill.00005
OpenAI 2023 OpenAI (2023). GPT-4 technical report. Company report, the owner's account of its own work https://arxiv.org/abs/2303.08774
Oska 2020 Oska, Lerma, Topf (2020). A picture is worth a thousand views: a triple crossover trial of visual abstracts to examine their impact on research dissemination. Journal of Medical Internet Research 22(12) https://doi.org/10.2196/22327
Page 2021 Page, McKenzie, Bossuyt, et al. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ 372 https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71
Paltridge 2002 Paltridge (2002). Thesis and dissertation writing: an examination of published advice and actual practice. English for Specific Purposes 21(2), 125-143 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0889-4906(00)00025-9
Pferschy-Wenzig 2016 Pferschy-Wenzig, Pferschy, Wang, Mocan, Atanasov (2016). Does a graphical abstract bring more visibility to your paper? Molecules 21(9) https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules21091247
Pimentel 2019 Pimentel, Murta, Braganholo, Freire (2019). A large-scale study about quality and reproducibility of Jupyter notebooks. IEEE/ACM 16th International Conference on Mining Software Repositories https://doi.org/10.1109/MSR.2019.00077
Pineau 2021 Pineau, Vincent-Lamarre, Sinha, et al. (2021). Improving reproducibility in machine learning research (a report from the NeurIPS 2019 reproducibility program). Journal of Machine Learning Research 22 https://arxiv.org/abs/2003.12206
Pinelli 1982 Pinelli, Glassman, Cordle (1982). Survey of reader preferences concerning the format of NASA technical reports. NASA Technical Memorandum 84502 https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/19820026424
Pinelli 1984 Pinelli, Cordle, Glassman, Vondran (1984). Report format preferences of technical managers and nonmanagers. Technical Communication 31(2) https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/19840062785
Pinelli 1997 Pinelli, Barclay, Kennedy (1997). Survey of reader preferences concerning the format of NASA Langley-authored technical reports. Publishing Research Quarterly 13(2), 48-68 https://doi.org/10.1007/s12109-997-0018-8
Pinker 2014 Pinker (2014). The Sense of Style: The Thinking Person's Guide to Writing in the 21st Century. Viking https://books.google.com/books?vid=ISBN9780670025855
Pitkin 1999 Pitkin, Branagan, Burmeister (1999). Accuracy of data in abstracts of published research articles. JAMA 281(12) https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.281.12.1110
Plavén-Sigray 2017 Plavén-Sigray, Matheson, Schiffler, Thompson (2017). The readability of scientific texts is decreasing over time. eLife 6 https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.27725
PLOS 2026 PLOS Medicine (undated, read 2026). Revising your manuscript: author summary. Journal author instructions https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/s/revising-your-manuscript
Powell 2017 Powell, Hebert, Cohen, Casa, Firmender (2017). A synthesis of mathematics writing: assessments, interventions, and surveys. Journal of Writing Research 8(3), 493-526 as printed on the article (Crossref lists 493-530) https://doi.org/10.17239/jowr-2017.08.03.04
Ramdas 2026 Ramdas (undated, read 2026). Checklist for effectively writing papers in stat-ML. Carnegie Mellon University https://www.stat.cmu.edu/~aramdas/checklists/aadi-paper-checklist.pdf
Reddy 2010 Reddy, Andrade (2010). A review of rubric use in higher education. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 35(4), 435-448 https://doi.org/10.1080/02602930902862859
Renear 2009 Renear, Palmer (2009). Strategic reading, ontologies, and the future of scientific publishing. Science 325(5942) https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1157784
Rodriguez 2021 Rodriguez, Hwang, Gelles (2021). Comparing corporate and university publication activity in AI/ML. CSET data brief, Georgetown University https://cset.georgetown.edu/publication/comparing-corporate-and-university-publication-activity-in-ai-ml/
Rogers 2021 Rogers, Baldwin, Leins (2021). "Just what do you think you're doing, Dave?" A checklist for responsible data use in NLP. Findings of EMNLP 2021, 4821-4833 https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2021.findings-emnlp.414
Roy 2017b Roy, Inglis, Alcock (2017). Multimedia resources designed to support learning from written proofs: an eye-movement study. Educational Studies in Mathematics 96(2), 249-266 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-017-9754-7
Saucez 2019 Saucez, Iannone, Bonaventure (2019). Evaluating the artifacts of SIGCOMM papers. ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review 49(2), 44-47 https://doi.org/10.1145/3336937.3336944
Scheel 2021 Scheel, Schijen, Lakens (2021). An excess of positive results: comparing the standard psychology literature with Registered Reports. Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science 4(2) https://doi.org/10.1177/25152459211007467
Schulz 2010 Schulz, Altman, Moher (2010). CONSORT 2010 statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. BMJ 340 https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.c332
Selden 2003 Selden, Selden (2003). Validations of proofs considered as texts: can undergraduates tell whether an argument proves a theorem? Journal for Research in Mathematics Education 34(1), 4-36 https://doi.org/10.2307/30034698
Serre 2003 Serre (2003). How to write mathematics badly. Talk, Basic Notions Seminar, Harvard (video) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ECQyFzzBHlo
Sharma 2006 Sharma, Harrison (2006). Structured abstracts: do they improve the quality of information in abstracts? American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics 130(4) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2005.10.023
Sharmini 2015 Sharmini, Spronken-Smith, Golding, Harland (2015). Assessing the doctoral thesis when it includes published work. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 40(1), 89-102 https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2014.888535
Sheffield 2017 University of Sheffield (2017). Technical report writing for engineers: why do you need an abstract? Transcript of practitioner interviews https://mee.group.shef.ac.uk/Report_writing_website/downloads/Why_do_you_need_an_abstract.pdf
Silyn-Roberts 2002 Silyn-Roberts (2002). Document structure and its effect on engineers' reading strategies. Journal of Professional Issues in Engineering Education and Practice 128(3), 115-119 https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)1052-3928(2002)128:3(115)
Simera 2010 Simera, Moher, Hoey, Schulz, Altman (2010). A catalogue of reporting guidelines for health research. European Journal of Clinical Investigation 40(1) https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2362.2009.02234.x
Soderberg 2021 Soderberg, Errington, Schiavone, et al. (2021). Initial evidence of research quality of registered reports compared with the standard publishing model. Nature Human Behaviour 5 https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-021-01142-4
Sollaci 2004 Sollaci, Pereira (2004). The introduction, methods, results, and discussion (IMRAD) structure: a fifty-year survey. Journal of the Medical Library Association 92(3) https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC442179/
Spyridakis 2000 Spyridakis, Fukuoka (2000). Japanese readers' comprehension of and preferences for inductively versus deductively organized text. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication 43(4), 355-367 https://doi.org/10.1109/47.888811
Spyridakis 2002 Spyridakis, Fukuoka (2002). The effect of inductively versus deductively organized text on American and Japanese readers. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication 45(2), 99-114 https://doi.org/10.1109/TPC.2002.1003692
Stanford 2023 Stanford CS103 course staff (2023). Proofwriting checklist (page updated 2023-06-30) https://web.stanford.edu/class/archive/cs/cs103/cs103.1248/proofwriting_checklist
Steiner 1978 Steiner (1978). Mathematical explanation. Philosophical Studies 34(2), 135-151 https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00354494
Sternadori 2008 Sternadori (2008). Cognitive processing of news as a function of structure: a comparison between inverted pyramid and chronology. PhD thesis, University of Missouri https://mospace.umsystem.edu/items/4f5c3c35-b2a9-4339-bc2f-4672afe32f88
Stevens 2014 Stevens, Shamseer, Weinstein, Yazdi, Turner, Thielman, Altman, Hirst, Hoey, Palepu, Schulz, Moher (2014). Relation of completeness of reporting of health research to journals' endorsement of reporting guidelines: systematic review. BMJ 348, g3804 https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.g3804
Stodden 2018 Stodden, Seiler, Ma (2018). An empirical analysis of journal policy effectiveness for computational reproducibility. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 115(11), 2584-2589 https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1708290115
Stoll 2022 Stoll, Kerwer, Lieb, Chasiotis (2022). Plain language summaries: a systematic review of theory, guidelines and empirical research. PLOS ONE 17(6), e0268789 https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0268789
Stylianides 2017 Stylianides, Stylianides, Weber (2017). Research on the teaching and learning of proof: taking stock and moving forward. In Compendium for Research in Mathematics Education, NCTM, chapter 10 (author copy read; year and pages 237-266 from the Oxford repository record) https://sites.math.rutgers.edu/~jpmejia/files/Stylianides_Weber_%28Compedium%29.pdf
Stylianides 2024 Stylianides, Stylianides, Moutsios-Rentzos (2024). Proof and proving in school and university mathematics education research: a systematic review. ZDM Mathematics Education 56, 47-59 (abstract read) https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-023-01518-y
Suchan 1989 Suchan, Colucci (1989). An analysis of communication efficiency between high-impact and bureaucratic written communication. Management Communication Quarterly 2(4), 454-484 https://doi.org/10.1177/0893318989002004002
Swales 1990 Swales (1990). Genre Analysis: English in Academic and Research Settings. Cambridge University Press https://books.google.com/books?vid=ISBN9780521338134
Swales 2004 Swales (2004). Research Genres: Explorations and Applications. Cambridge University Press https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139524827
Swales 2012 Swales, Feak (2012). Academic Writing for Graduate Students: Essential Tasks and Skills, 3rd edition. University of Michigan Press https://doi.org/10.3998/mpub.2173936
Sword 2012 Sword (2012). Stylish Academic Writing. Harvard University Press https://doi.org/10.4159/harvard.9780674065093
Taddio 1994 Taddio, Pain, Fassos, Boon, Ilersich, Einarson (1994). Quality of nonstructured and structured abstracts of original research articles in the BMJ, the CMAJ and JAMA. CMAJ 150(10) https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC1336964/
Tao 2023 Tao (2023). Formalizing the proof of PFR in Lean4 using Blueprint: a short tour https://terrytao.wordpress.com/2023/11/18/formalizing-the-proof-of-pfr-in-lean4-using-blueprint-a-short-tour/
Tao 2026a Tao (undated, read 2026). Use the introduction to "sell" the key points of your paper. Blog page in the series Advice on writing papers https://terrytao.wordpress.com/advice-on-writing-papers/use-the-introduction-to-%E2%80%9Csell%E2%80%9D-the-key-points-of-your-paper/
Tao 2026b Tao (undated, read 2026). Organise the paper. Blog page in the series Advice on writing papers https://terrytao.wordpress.com/advice-on-writing-papers/organise-the-paper/
Tao 2026c Tao (undated, read 2026). Create lemmas. Blog page in the series Advice on writing papers https://terrytao.wordpress.com/advice-on-writing-papers/create-lemmas/
Tao 2026d Tao (undated, read 2026). On "local" and "global" errors in mathematical papers, and how to detect them. Blog page in the series Advice on writing papers https://terrytao.wordpress.com/advice-on-writing-papers/on-local-and-global-errors-in-mathematical-papers-and-how-to-detect-them/
Taylor 2024 Taylor & Francis (2024). Plain Language Summaries of Publications (PLSP): author guidelines for development, submission and publication, version of 22 March 2024 (from the file's metadata). Publisher guideline https://authorservices.taylorandfrancis.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/V9-PLSP-Guidelines-for-Authors-UPDATE-22-Mar-2024.pdf
Teledahl 2024 Teledahl, Kilhamn, Ahl, Helenius (2024). Defining and measuring quality in students' mathematical writing: a systematic literature review. Mathematics Education Research Journal 37, 557-576 (abstract read) https://doi.org/10.1007/s13394-024-00501-4
Tenopir 2008 Tenopir, King (2008). Electronic journals and changes in scholarly article seeking and reading patterns. D-Lib Magazine 14(11/12) https://doi.org/10.1045/november2008-tenopir
Tenopir 2015 Tenopir, King, Christian, Volentine (2015). Scholarly article seeking, reading, and use: a continuing evolution from print to electronic in the sciences and social sciences. Learned Publishing 28(2) https://doi.org/10.1087/20150203
Thurston 1994 Thurston (1994). On proof and progress in mathematics. Bulletin of the AMS 30(2), 161-177; preprint arXiv math/9404236 https://doi.org/10.1090/S0273-0979-1994-00502-6
Timperley 2021 Timperley, Herckis, Le Goues, Hilton (2021). Understanding and improving artifact sharing in software engineering research. Empirical Software Engineering 26(4) https://doi.org/10.1007/s10664-021-09973-5
Tran Minh 2025 Tran Minh, Gonnord, Narboux (2025). Proof assistants for teaching: a survey. arXiv preprint (abstract read) https://arxiv.org/abs/2505.13472
TSE 2017 Toulouse School of Economics (2017). M1 rapport de stage: grille d'évaluation. School grid, the school's own rule https://alumni.tse-fr.eu/medias/editor/files/M1_Grille_%C3%A9valuation_rapports_de_stage_2017.pdf
Turner 2012 Turner, Shamseer, Altman, et al. (2012). Consolidated standards of reporting trials (CONSORT) and the completeness of reporting of randomised controlled trials published in medical journals. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews MR000030 https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.MR000030.pub2
UGA 2026 Université Grenoble Alpes (2024-09-06, sheet last updated; catalogue read 2026). UE Stage M1, Master Sciences et techniques des activités physiques et sportives. Unit sheet, the university's own rule https://formations.univ-grenoble-alpes.fr/plugins/odf-web/odf/_content/course-stage-126/UE%20Stage%20M1.pdf
ULB 2025 Université libre de Bruxelles (2025). Programme page, stage unit STAG-F011, academic year 2025-2026. Programme page, the university's own rule https://www.ulb.be/fr/programme/2025-stag-f011
Uskuplu 2026 Uskuplu, Moss, de Paiva (2026). KnowTeX: visualizing mathematical dependencies. arXiv preprint, version 3 (abstract read) https://arxiv.org/abs/2601.15294
UT 2024 University of Twente, PSTS (2024). Appendix 3, internship assessment form, PSTS Internship Guide 2024-2025. Assessment form, the programme's own rule https://www.utwente.nl/en/psts/master/internship/psts-internship-appendix-3-internship-assessment-form.pdf
van Gasteren 1990 van Gasteren (1990). On the Shape of Mathematical Arguments. Lecture Notes in Computer Science 445. Springer https://doi.org/10.1007/BFb0020908
Vasilevsky 2013 Vasilevsky, Brush, Paddock, Ponting, Tripathy, LaRocca, Haendel (2013). On the reproducibility of science: unique identification of research resources in the biomedical literature. PeerJ 1, e148 https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.148
Wang 2024 Wang, Clark (2024). Simplifying scholarly abstracts for accessible digital libraries. Preprint https://arxiv.org/abs/2408.03899
Weber 2004 Weber (2004). Traditional instruction in advanced mathematics courses: a case study of one professor's lectures and proofs in an introductory real analysis course. Journal of Mathematical Behavior 23(2), 115-133 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmathb.2004.03.001
Weber 2008 Weber (2008). How mathematicians determine if an argument is a valid proof. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education 39(4), 431-459 https://doi.org/10.5951/jresematheduc.39.4.0431
Weber 2011 Weber, Mejia-Ramos (2011). Why and how mathematicians read proofs: an exploratory study. Educational Studies in Mathematics 76(3), 329-344 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-010-9292-z
Weber 2013 Weber, Mejía-Ramos (2013). On mathematicians' proof skimming: a reply to Inglis and Alcock. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education 44(2), 464-471 https://doi.org/10.5951/jresematheduc.44.2.0464
Weber 2015 Weber (2015). Effective proof reading strategies. Int. J. Research in Undergraduate Mathematics Education. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40753-015-0011-0
Weinberger 2015 Weinberger, Evans, Allesina (2015). Ten simple (empirical) rules for writing science. PLOS Computational Biology 11(4) https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1004205
Wenzel 1999 Wenzel (1999). Isar: a generic interpretative approach to readable formal proof documents. TPHOLs 1999, LNCS 1690, 167-183 https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-48256-3_12
Williams 2018 Williams, Kemp (2018 online, 2019 print). Independent markers of master's theses show low levels of agreement. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 44(5), 764-771 https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2018.1535052
Winter 2022 Winter, Timperley, Hermann, Cito, Bell, Hilton, Beyer (2022). A retrospective study of one decade of artifact evaluations. ESEC/FSE 2022, 145-156 https://doi.org/10.1145/3540250.3549172
Yang 2016 Yang (2016). Evaluative language and interactive discourse in journal article highlights. English for Specific Purposes 42 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2016.01.001