Information Technology Reference
In-Depth Information
Balance
Within a paper, each topic should be discussed to a similar depth. A paragraph on a
previous algorithm followed by seven pages on your refinements to it is unbalanced. If
one paper merits half a page, other papers of equal relevance should not be dismissed
in a line. An algorithm that is only sketched does not merit twenty graphs and
tables; an algorithm that is described in detail needs a substantial analysis or other
justification. A four-page rambling introduction is unlikely to be readable.
The length of a paper is a consequence of how much material is included and of
how much detail is given, that is, the depth to which each topic is discussed. When
a paper must be kept within a length limit, some compromise is required. Some of
the discussion must be omitted, or the graphs selected more carefully, or the text
condensed. Perhaps it will even be necessary to omit a proof or a series of results.
Such changes should not be used as an excuse for unbalancing the paper.
Vo i c e
Avoid excessive use of indirect statements (
passive voice
), particularly descriptions
of actions that don't indicate who or what performs them.
The following theorem can now be proved.
We can now prove the following theorem.
The direct style (
active voice
) is often less stilted and easier to read.
Another unpleasant indirect style is the artificial use of verbs like “perform” or
“utilize”, perhaps in the false belief that such writing is more precise or scientific.
These words can often be removed.
Tree structures can be utilized for dynamic storage of terms.
Terms can be stored in dynamic tree structures.
Local packet transmission was performed to test error rates.
Error rates were tested by local packet transmission.
Other words often used in this way include “achieved”, “carried out”, “conducted”,
“done”, “occurred”, and “effected”.
Change of voice sometimes changes meaning and often changes emphasis. If
passive voice is necessary, use it. Complete absence of active voice is unpleasant,
but that does not mean that all use of passive voice is poor.
Use of “we” is valuable when trying to distinguish between the contribution made
in your paper and existing results in a field, particularly in an abstract or introduction.
(Footnote 1 continued)
be the goal, which was to introduce new approaches to measurement of packet delays. A sentence
would have been sufficient.
