Introduction - Writing for Computer Science - page 3

papers are usually refereed, but with more limited opportunities for iteration and
revision, and may be constrained by strict length limits. There is no universal defin-
ition of “extended abstract”, but a common meaning is that the detail of the work is
omitted. That is, an extended abstract may review the results of a research program,
but may not include enough detail to make a solid argument for the claims.
In contrast to topics—which can reflect an author's opinions as well as report
on established scientific knowledge—the content of a paper must be defended and
justified. This is the purpose of reviewing: to attempt to ensure that papers published
in a reputable journal or conference are trustworthy, high-quality work. Indeed, in
a common usage a published paper is distinguished from a mere paper by having
been refereed.
A typical research paper consists of the arguments, evidence, experiments, proofs,
and background required to support and explain a central hypothesis. In contrast, the
process of research that leads to a paper can include uninteresting failures, invalid
hypotheses, misconceptions, and experimental mistakes. With few exceptions these
do not belong in a paper. While a thesis might be more inclusive, for example if
the author includes a critical reflection on how the work developed over the course
of a Ph.D., such material would usually be limited to mistakes or failures that are
genuinely illuminating. A paper or thesis should be an objective addition to scientific
knowledge, not a description of the path that was taken to the result. Thus “style” is
not just about how to write, but is also about what to say.
Writing, Science, and Skepticism
Science is a system for accumulating reliable knowledge. Broadly speaking, the
process of science begins with speculation, observation, and a growing understand-
ing of some idea or phenomenon. This understanding is used to shape research
questions, which in turn are used to develop hypotheses that can be tested by proof
or experimentation. The results are described in a paper, which is then submitted for
independent review before (hopefully) being published; or the results are described
in a thesis that is then submitted for examination.
Writing underpins the whole of the research cycle. A key aspect of writing is that
the discipline of stating ideas as logical, organized text forces you to formulate and
clarify your thoughts. Concepts and ideas are made concrete; the act of writing sug-
gests new concepts to consider; written material can be systematically discussed and
debated with colleagues; and the only effective way to develop complex arguments or
threads of reasoning, and evaluatewhether they are robust, is towrite themdown. That
is, writing is not the end of the research process, but instead shapes it. Only the styling
of a paper, the polishing process, truly takes place after the research is complete.
Thus the ability to write well is a key skill of science. Like many aspects of
research, writing can only be thoroughly learnt while working with other researchers.
Too often, however, the only help a novice receives is an advisor's feedback on drafts
of papers. Such interaction can be far from adequate: many researchers have little