26

In my opinion you shouldn't change the title. The purpose of your reference is letting your readers find the referenced work, so changing the title (even if it is to correct a mistake) may make this harder or even create inconsistencies in scientific indexing services.


17

To add to the answers already posted: authors themselves sometimes avoid diacritics, presumably because they (used to) complicate indexing and search as well as increase the likelihood of citation errors. A colleague of mine decided to forego diacritics in his papers and on his Google Scholar profile for this reason. So if you suspect that might be the case ...


9

This is really opinion based. I am happy my surname contains one letter beyond basic ASCII table... The reasons I purposedly ommit the accent are: Inconsistent encoding. You know, UTF-8, CP1250, Latin2,... All of them use the space beyond plain ASCII but in completely different manner and no-one knows what are the default settings. There are many accents ...


7

If at all possible you should cite the most recent official (published, peer reviewed) version. You could consider contacting the author to ask if the arXiv version differs in any way that might matter in your context. A librarian might be able to help with that too. You can note in your bibliography that a version of article is also available on arXiv.


5

What do people exactly mean when they say "non-archival venues" although the venue might have "publications"? Usually a conference/workshop is made "non-archival" so that the research presented at the venue can be published somewhere else (either before or after the event), i.e. the venue does not require exclusivity. An author can present their work to ...


5

I don't really agree with the other answer. It's still used in recent publications, and not just in the US. I've recently seen this in the Annales Mathématiques Blaise Pascal (random French example) and all AMS publications until very recently (at least 2013, although they changed the style between then and now). "I've never seen this" doesn't really prove ...


5

The proper advice, I think, is to ask for co-authorship on any future papers that use your technique. Point out that you are actually due this for having developed the technique and even more for adapting it to the other students' work. Not for "helping them" adapt it. For adapting it. Nor would I be shy about saying that they made an error in not including ...


4

Cite it. It's a source you used, so you need to cite. In addition, good explanations are also good for readers who are looking for an introduction. didn't go through the usual peer review process Where I am, a Master thesis is reviewed (+ graded) by two professors, and that can include a list of required corrections/clarification for the final version....


4

I suspect you're overthinking this. I would just write something like: II. Related Work A. Statistical Model Our work uses a statistical model from X et al [44]. As this model is of fundamental importance in our work, we will present a thorough summary of their work in this subsection. ... B. Something Else.


3

Should I be referencing these titles exactly as they have written it, or should I correct them? Look for those authors' websites; other published work; and especially works they published all by themselves. If the lack-of-diacritics is an outlier, I'd say add them; otherwise leave them out.


3

This seems like a naive view of citations. They aren't "likes" or even recommendations to read a paper. They reference things that actually support and form a background for a new work. So, if citations suddenly explode within a field, and people are working honestly and not just gaming the system, then that field must be pretty hot with a lot of actual ...


3

Biologist here. I tend to be more careful to cite methodology on a poster rather than things that belong in an introduction or discussion section, and especially anything derived directly from a particular paper, such as an equation that is on the poster. Sometimes there is a particular key reference - either a review or highly relevant original paper - ...


3

While the details are dependent on the venue where you are publishing, most mathematical papers will put the full citations at the end but reference them in the midst of the text (e.g., via a citation number). You can format these automatically if you use LaTeX, and the AMS provides widely used packages for formatting.


3

This is, perhaps, a judgement call. I would correct them. There may be "reasons" why the original wasn't accurate, even if it is just not knowing how to produce the letters of an expanded alphabet on your keyboard. I suspect, but don't know, that the diacritics might actually change the meaning in a few cases. But in this case it is proper to "honor" the ...


3

I've been looking into this as well. And despite Jan's answer being plenty adequate to your question and extremely informational beyond, I may be able to add this; The first mention of this saying was supposedly by Aristotle, but he said "greater than the sum...". Where Koffka's version is "other than the sum..." I believe the key here is that Koffka's way ...


3

This is hard to answer precisely without seeing your entire document. In general, I'd say if it is very obvious what you are talking about, then you do not need to cite again. The problem is that what is "obvious" to one person is not obvious to another. Especially it can be hard for you to know if it is obvious or not because you are too close to it. ...


2

As you describe what you want to do, you wouldn't need permission. You need to avoid plagiarism by citing and you need to avoid copyright infringement by not over-quoting. But your description is probably safe. In particular, for purposes of analysis and criticism the copyright laws (most places) are a bit more lenient than otherwise. These normally come ...


2

I have seen this style in a number of older IEEE publications (in Computer Science and related fields). Most commonly, I have seen this reference style used in old publications, and rarely on anything published after 2000. For another example you can check: L. Vincent, and P. Soille. "Watersheds in digital spaces: an efficient algorithm based on ...


2

In principle, you should only conduct a systematic literature review (SLR) if: none has already been done recently; the only ones recently done are deficient in some way (that you will clearly explain and correct); or you adopt a very different perspective that adds something significantly valuable that is different from the recently published good review (...


2

As with many questions here, there are two issues: plagiarism and copyright infringement. By citing the work of another you avoid plagiarism, which is claiming the work of another as your own. So you have no issues with that. Copyright infringement, however, is governed by laws that vary by jurisdiction. Normally (i.e. most jurisdictions) you can copy (...


2

Yes. Under review or "in review" are normal and I have used them myself when publishing several papers near simultaneously. (They were separate enough, different chemistries, that I thought made sense to cut into separate articles. But, for someone interested in the general area, they likely would want the citation.) It is to be understood that "under ...


2

In fields where arxiv usage is standard (e.g. high energy physics or astronomy), standard practice is to cite the arxiv identifier of the article along with any journal reference. (Journals tend to remove them upon publication, but that is very much their problem.) Some of the most commonly used abstract indexing services in those fields (e.g. inSPIRE or ...


1

This is a known tricky situation, which I've often seen addressed incorrectly (people citing the published version, but actually meaning the arXiv version). My personal way of solving this is: I cite the published version in the bibliography, but when I actually reference it, I add a footnote saying that I'm referring to the arXiv version. This is honest ...


1

You can use Microsoft Word on the add reference tab-new source (Im using Word in another language, so the term might vary in english, and click on the extended info. There is an option for multimedia/digital mediums. You dont need to add the specific frame. You cite the entire video and where you retrieved in case it's online (or as movie if its a movie). ...


1

CS/AI: I absolutely don’t cite anything beyond the bare minimum and place citations in tiny font at the bottom. The point of the poster is to get people to read your paper. They need to get the TL;DR version of it on the way to get tea and cookies, and your poster needs to be more interesting than the robocup tournament. Put the main message in a few ...


1

Of course you should have references. (Unless chemistry is really different from other disciplines.) But it is probably acceptable to make it a pretty short section, and perhaps refer to another document if asked for more details. In particular, are there 2-3 most important references you could cite in "short format" with "et al." to make them short ...


1

If it is a discussion board the audience are only the course instructor and the students of the course, whether or not you repeat the citation in your answer is not going to have any important or lasting effect. That said, while a very strict instructor might complain if you do not repeat the citation, I cannot imagine any way in which repeating the citation ...


1

I would use a preprint server, such as arXiv and bioRxiv, and then cite the preprint version of the paper. In my opinion, there is no purpose in citing a paper that is not available anywhere. You cannot be sure in which journal your article will be published nor if after revision it will remain with the same title you referenced. Furthermore, after the ...


1

I need to use facts and statistics in my essay. You should always indicate the source of your facts and statistics. That means you will need to use citations. Which format to choose? The social sciences typically use APA, MLA, or Chicago Manual of Style. They are very different: MLA uses in-text citations while CMS uses footnotes. Use the one you prefer ...


1

Speaking generally diagrams are the creative work of the original author and you should not reproduce a diagram in your published work without permission from the person who created it. If, however, the diagram was published under some sort of license that allows reuse (e.g. CC BY 2.0) then you can reproduce it along the terms of the license. If there is no ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible