Re:No Paper Is That Good
by sweezyjeezy on Friday July 13, 2018 @02:42AM
(#17520958)
FWIW, I don't think this article really applies to areas like maths or computer science, where the main output is theorems or algorithms that can be verified line by line. It's more about empirical science where one is trying to prove/disprove hypotheses through rigorous experimentation.
No, I don’t think so, either. In math, there are excellent papers that cover .01% of what needs to be said about the subject, and ordinary or even bad papers that say much more. Provided there are no serious logical errors, the difference is simply how important is the question being answered.
Edit: Although it may go without saying, all else being equal, a better paper is easier to read than a lesser one. But, really, content is king.
Read the title and abstract. Then read the statements of the main theorems and corollaries (skip the lemmas and interstitial commentary at first). At each step, evaluate whether you want to continue or abandon the paper for whatever reason (not interesting, not relevant, whatever).
Finally, if you made it this far, read the whole paper word for word with a pen and paper (or chalk + chalkboard) handy.
For longer papers or books/theses (say, 20+ pages), do this whole process on each individual section/part/chapter that you want to consume.
It also helps to have a reason to read the paper besides curiosity. I find things that are relevant to current work to be easier to get through than more peripheral sorts of things. Having a colleague to discuss things with also helps.