Effective Literature Review
Workshop Series 1
N27, FSKSM UTM
18 Nov 2011
Literature Review Stages
• Stage 1
– Acquire general knowledge about high level domain
– Identify domain and problem(s)
• Stage 2
– Identify the solution approaches
– Identify active community
• Stage 3
– Build solution to your problem
Where to find Related Literature?
Google is better than ask Bing or Yahoo
Google Scholar is better than Google
‘Algorithm’ for Relevant Literature
Step (1) : Find a couple of papers
Step (2) : Get their referenced papers
Step (3) : Get papers that cited these papers
Step (4) : Repeat (1) -> (3) until you hardly find
Step (5) : At later stages, research community
websites also best resources
From Dr Anjum’s Talk (FSKSM, UTM) 2011
STAGE 1: Objective
Highly recommended for starters, once every
year or two or experienced ones
– General knowledge of high level domain
What’s new (domains and problems) ?
Can there be something (domain and problem) new ?
Is something obsolete ?
Is there a rebirth ?
Is there a new knowledge resource ?
STAGE 1: Procedure
• Always start with research papers
– Use books where you need help
• Survey papers
• Books (ONLY if required)
– Reading/skimming, not eating
• How to read papers at this stage
– Introduction and Conclusion
– Rephrasing and writing in your own words is
STAGE 1: Conclusion
• Should not be prolonged beyond 4 months in any
• After reading papers from one domain, ask
– Have I found “THE” problem ?
– If NOT
• Have I found some problems ?
– If YES
• Try finding “THE” problem or reject all
– If NOT
• Seek help, something is probably wrong somewhere
Stage 1 : Closing in on a problem
• After reading X number of papers, you should
ask yourself :
– What is t problem that I shall be working on?
• In the beginning, there can be more than one problems
that you think you should work on
– Of the X papers that I have read, how many are
related to my problem ?
Stage 2 : Start & Objective
• By this time, you should be focused on only
– This problem may change later on and most likely
it will change
• Changing the problem in last 6 months of your PhD
• Identify approaches to solve “THE” problem
Stage 2 : Methodology
• Read research papers related to your problem
• List down possible methods of solving the
– Information theory is always used
– Stochastic or optimization theory is always used
– Closed form solutions are achieved OR heuristics are
– Also focus on paper writing style
– Skimming through body of papers helps
– You still do not need to eat papers
» This can cause serious digestion & stagnation problems
Stage 3 : Objective
• Solving your problem
Generally after stage 2, you select a couple of papers
Extract a solution
Extend a solution
Modify a solution
• Paper eating, chewing and digesting stage
• Possible solution approaches that are applicable on your
• This statement makes some unrelated papers to be related
• That’s where understanding of domain (not problem)
• That’s where general knowledge also comes in
• That’s where undergrdauate courses come in
Stage 3 : Methodology
• You entirely build your own solution
– Highly unlikely : Remember its not rocket science
• Most likely world will not be different within 1 year of your
PhD completion (Exception excluded)
• You should provide incremental solution by
modifying one of the existing solution OR
applying existing technique
– You need to understand existing technique to minute
level of details, hence paper chewing
The Market Need. What is the
purpose of the document? Who
will read it? How will the reader
use it? The answers help you
decide the length, the level of
detail, the style.
• To write well, you need a design.
• Design activity involves 5 steps
The Concept. Good writing starts
with a plan. Writers have
different ways of developing plans.
The Embodiment. The
embodiment is the first draft.
Get the facts down on paper
without worrying about style;
make drafts of each section;
develop the calculations; sketch
the figures; assemble references.
Detail. Now comes the crafting:
clarity, balance, readability; in a word — The End-Product. Appearance is important: good
layout, clear headings, well-designed figures
EMBODIMENT—The First Draft
• Now the hard work. Break the job
down into stages. The usual stages in
writing a paper are set out in the
boxes below. Papers are not drafted
sequentially; do it in any order you
• Get the scientific facts and technical
details down, the ideas
formulated, the graphs and figures
• If good ways of expressing the ideas
occur to you now, use them; but do
not deflect effort from the key job of
assembling the pieces, in whatever
form them come.
• Try for one sentence each on
motive, method, key results, conclusions.
• Don’t exceed 3 sentences on any one
• The reader of an Abstract has been lured by the
title (title must be informative ~reflects the
contents & interesting)
• Tell them, in as few sentences as possible, what
they will find. No waffle, no spurious details.
• Try not to exceed 100 words.
• What is the problem and why is it interesting?
• Who are the main contributors?
• What did they do?
• What novel thing will you reveal?
• Outline the problem and why it was worth tackling. Review
the literature, recording briefly the main contributors and
summarizing the status of the field when you started the
• Provide any specialized information that the reader might
need if he is to understand what follows. State what you will
do that has not been done before (new experimental
approach? new data? new model? new interpretation?) Keep
it as brief as you can whilst still doing all this.
• Experimental paper: equipment, materials, method
• Modelling paper: assumptions, mathematical tools, method
• Computational paper: inputs, computational tools, method
Explain what is especially different about your method
Give sufficient detail that the reader can reproduce what you did
Don’t mix Method with Results or Discussion—they come next
This should be an easy section to write: just say what you did, succinctly
Use “we” but do so sparingly: too many “we’s” sounds
like a child’s day out: “first we did this, then we did that.”
Build up a reference list as you go
It is one of the principles of science that a paper should contain
sufficient detail to allow the work to be repeated by someone else
• Present the output of the
experiments, model or computation
• Don’t mix Results with Discussion
Easy section to write
Report your results simply, without opinion or interpretation at this stage.
Define all symbols and units. Present data in a form other people can use
Give emphasis in the text the most important aspects of the tables, graphs
Give error-bars or confidence-limits for numerical or graphical data.
Statistics should be meaningful; avoid confidence-eroding statements such
as “33.3% of the samples failed: 33.3% survived; the third sample was
Aim for a concise, economical style.
Poor: It is clearly shown in Figure 3 that the shear loading had caused the
cell-walls to suffer ductile fracture or possibly brittle failure.
Better: Shear loading fractures cell-walls
• Extract principles, relationships, generalizations
• Present analysis, model or theory
• Show relationship between the results and analysis, model or theory
• Here you are seeking to extract principles, relationships, or generalizations
from the results. Sometimes the results speak for themselves
The novel heat-treatment described in Section 2 gives steels which are 10% stronger
and 20% tougher than those heat-treated in the normal way.
• Most of the research we do aims at why materials behave as they do, and
this requires ideas about mechanisms, models and associated theory.
• Discussion is to describe the ideas, models and theories and lead the
reader through a comparison of these with the experimental or
• Bring out the most significant conclusions first; develop subsidiary
conclusions after that.
• Be clear and concise
• Draw together the most important results and
• List any reservations or limitations
• The reader scanning your paper will read the Abstract
and the Conclusions, glance at the Figures and move on.
• Do not duplicate the Abstract as the Conclusions or vice
• The Abstract is an overview of the entire paper. The
Conclusions are a summing up of the advances in
knowledge that have emerged from it
• Thank people who have helped you with
ideas, technical assistance, materials or finance
• Keep it simple, give full names and affiliation, and
don’t get sentimental
The research was supported by the EPSRC under grant
number EJA S67, by the DARPA-ONR MURI program under
contract number N00014-1-96- 1028, and by a Research
Fellowship from the National Research Council of Canada.
• Cite significant previous work
• Cite sources of theories, data, or anything else
you have taken from elsewhere
• References must be complete:
name, initials, year, title, journal, volume, startpage and finish-page
• References tell the reader where an idea, prior
results and data have come from
• Flow charts show methods, procedures
• Graphs plot data
• Schematics show how equipment works, or illustrate a
mechanism or model
• Drawings and photographs illustrate equipment, microstructures
• Anyone scanning your paper will look at the figures and their
captions, even if they do not read the text. Make each figure as selfcontained as possible, and give it both a title (on the figure itself)
and an informative caption (below it). Make sure that the axes are
properly labelled, that units are defined and that the figure will
tolerate reduction is size without becoming illegible.
• Label each curve of graphs
GRAMMAR (SOME TIPS)
• Grammar tells the reader the function of
words and their relationship. Mess up the
grammar and you confuse the reader
• Anjum Naveed, PhD “Effective Literature
• Mike Ashby, University of Cambridge “How to
Write a Paper”