0

I asked a question related to my current thesis on MathOverflow and got there a really helpful answer by Iosif Pinelis. Obviously, I want to cite his answer. Is it enough to put something like the following sentence at the beginning of the proof's chapter?

The following proof based on ideas given by Iosif Pinelis in a proof on mathoverflow.net [1]

([1] points to the reference of Pinelis' answer in the bibliography of my thesis)

Do I need to cite Pinelis' answer whenever I use a notation/an idea from his post (it might be hard to tell afterwards, which are my original ideas and which ideas come from his post)?

Improve this question

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
5

First, I would modify your sentence as (Mathoverflow etc. goes into the bibliography):

The following proof is based on the ideas given by Iosif Pinelis [1].

Then,

Do I need to cite Pinelis' answer whenever I use a notation/an idea of his post?

For the notation, you can make an addition to the sentence above (but explain the notation in the appropriate place):

The following proof is based on the ideas given by Iosif Pinelis [1]. The notation employed in this section shall follow closely that of the cited work (or some equivalent sentence).

Instead, when using an idea, yes, I would put again the reference "[1]".

Improve this answer
1
  • More generally, you need not only to cite "that" you have used the work of another, but you also need to cite "what" it is that you use. There might be various ways to do this, but both are essential.
    – Buffy
    Commented Oct 25, 2023 at 19:51

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .