Skip to main content
Tweeted twitter.com/#!/StackAcademia/status/481347107295858688
edited title
Link
adipro
  • 8.6k
  • 6
  • 44
  • 89

How do we properly include and cite a set of equations from another paper?

edited title
Link
adipro
  • 8.6k
  • 6
  • 44
  • 89

How do we properly quoteinclude a set of equations from another paper?

added 25 characters in body
Source Link
adipro
  • 8.6k
  • 6
  • 44
  • 89

When writing a paper which applies some known method to a new problem, for completeness we may need to summarize that method, probably as a section on its own.

In the paper where it was first proposed, the method was described in a set of equations. In my case, I need to include some of these equations, because I need to refer to them in the subsequent part of my paper.

Currently I write something like the following:

We apply the X method [citation], which we shall summarize below, to describe ...

and then comes the equations, interspersed with some texts, which are paraphrased from the originals.

How do we give the proper attribution to the paper in which the method was first described, without giving the impression that some of the equations are our own? Is the above sufficient? Including [citation] before every equation seems awkward, since all of these equations are from a single paper.

When writing a paper which applies some known method to a new problem, for completeness we may need to summarize that method, probably as a section on its own.

In the paper where it was first proposed, the method was described in a set of equations. In my case, I need to include some of these equations, because I need to refer to them in the subsequent part of my paper.

Currently I write something like the following:

We apply the X method [citation] to describe ...

and then comes the equations, interspersed with some texts, which are paraphrased from the originals.

How do we give the proper attribution to the paper in which the method was first described, without giving the impression that some of the equations are our own? Including [citation] before every equation seems awkward, since all of these equations are from a single paper.

When writing a paper which applies some known method to a new problem, for completeness we may need to summarize that method, probably as a section on its own.

In the paper where it was first proposed, the method was described in a set of equations. In my case, I need to include some of these equations, because I need to refer to them in the subsequent part of my paper.

Currently I write something like the following:

We apply the X method [citation], which we shall summarize below, to describe ...

and then comes the equations, interspersed with some texts, which are paraphrased from the originals.

How do we give the proper attribution to the paper in which the method was first described, without giving the impression that some of the equations are our own? Is the above sufficient? Including [citation] before every equation seems awkward, since all of these equations are from a single paper.

Source Link
adipro
  • 8.6k
  • 6
  • 44
  • 89
Loading