Outline, Reading, and
Literature Review
M. R. C. van Dongen
Outline
Assignments
Reading
Literature Review
Outline, Reading, and Literature Review
Plagiarism
Further Resources
Acknowledgements
References
M. R. C. van Dongen
January 18, 2016
Outline
Outline, Reading, and
Literature Review
M. R. C. van Dongen
Outline
Assignments
Reading
Literature Review
Plagiarism
Further Resources
Acknowledgements
Assignments.
Reading.
Literature review.
References
Outline, Reading, and
Literature Review
Assignments: Note: No Extensions
M. R. C. van Dongen
Submit on Departmental moodle Site
Outline
Assignments
Reading
Literature Review
Plagiarism
Further Resources
Acknowledgements
Task
Typeset some text in LATEX
Abstract writing
Written literature review
Start
1 Feb
29 Feb
18 Jan
Due
29 Feb
20 Mar
4 Apr
Mark
20%
30%
50%
References
Assignment 1
Outline, Reading, and
Literature Review
M. R. C. van Dongen
Outline
Assignments
Reading
Literature Review
Plagiarism
Further Resources
Acknowledgements
References
Typeset a few pages from a book in LATEX.
Assignment 2
Outline, Reading, and
Literature Review
M. R. C. van Dongen
Outline
Assignments
Reading
Literature Review
Plagiarism
Further Resources
Acknowledgements
References
Write an abstract of a paper.
Assignment 3
Outline, Reading, and
Literature Review
M. R. C. van Dongen
Outline
Assignments
Reading
Literature Review
Plagiarism
Conduct a literature survey for your project.
Write a proper article about your findings.
Article should be about the literature survey only.
I consider project selection part of the literature review:
You need a project by 25 January.
The project website, project.ucc.ie, provides a project list.
You should enroll on the project website.
Further Resources
Acknowledgements
References
How to read a paper?
Outline, Reading, and
Literature Review
M. R. C. van Dongen
Outline
Assignments
Reading
Literature Review
Plagiarism
Further Resources
Acknowledgements
There’s no algorithm for reading a paper.
The 3-pass approach from Keshav is reasonable.
This is probably how most seasoned readers read.
References
Keshav’s 3-Pass Approach
Outline, Reading, and
Literature Review
M. R. C. van Dongen
Outline
Assignments
Reading
Literature Review
Plagiarism
Further Resources
Acknowledgements
Purpose
Quick overview
Grasp content
Understanding
Answer Questions About
Category; Context; Correctness; Contribution; Clarity
Paper content; Relevance (to you)
Key ideas; Implicit assumptions; Proof techniques
References
Keshav’s 3-Pass Approach
Outline, Reading, and
Literature Review
M. R. C. van Dongen
Pass 1: 5–20 Minutes
Outline
Assignments
Reading
Literature Review
Plagiarism
Further Resources
Acknowledgements
Purpose
Quick overview
Grasp content
Understanding
Answer Questions About
Category; Context; Correctness; Contribution; Clarity
Paper content; Relevance (to you)
Key ideas; Implicit assumptions; Proof techniques
References
Keshav’s 3-Pass Approach
Outline, Reading, and
Literature Review
M. R. C. van Dongen
Pass 2: 60–90 Minutes
Outline
Assignments
Reading
Literature Review
Plagiarism
Further Resources
Acknowledgements
Purpose
Quick overview
Grasp content
Understanding
Answer Questions About
Category; Context; Correctness; Contribution; Clarity
Paper content; Relevance (to you)
Key ideas; Implicit assumptions; Proof techniques
References
Keshav’s 3-Pass Approach
Outline, Reading, and
Literature Review
M. R. C. van Dongen
Pass 3: 4– Hours!!
Outline
Assignments
Reading
Literature Review
Plagiarism
Further Resources
Acknowledgements
Purpose
Quick overview
Grasp content
Understanding
Answer Questions About
Category; Context; Correctness; Contribution; Clarity
Paper content; Relevance (to you)
Key ideas; Implicit assumptions; Proof techniques
References
Phase 1: Quick Overview
Outline, Reading, and
Literature Review
M. R. C. van Dongen
Outline
Assignments
Reading
Literature Review
Plagiarism
Carefully read abstract, title, and introduction.
Read section titles.
Read conclusions.
Read reference section.
Mark known references.
Mark unknown references that seem interesting.
Further Resources
Acknowledgements
References
Output of Phase 1
Outline, Reading, and
Literature Review
M. R. C. van Dongen
You Can Answer Questions About
Outline
Assignments
Reading
Literature Review
Plagiarism
Category What kind of paper is this? Theory; Systems;
Description; Survey; ….
Context What papers does it relate to? What theory/techniques
does it use? …. What field does it belong to? ….
Correctness Do the results seem correct?
Contributions What are the main contributions?
Clarity It the paper well written?
Need Does the paper seem relevant/useful? If not, dump it.
Further Resources
Acknowledgements
References
Phase 2: Grasp the Content/Background
Outline, Reading, and
Literature Review
M. R. C. van Dongen
Outline
Assignments
Reading
Read the paper, including proofs.
Don’t try to understand non-trivial/difficult/technical proofs.
Instead, note any assumptions. Are they reasonable?
Does the proof appear sound?
Literature Review
Plagiarism
Further Resources
Acknowledgements
References
Look at figures, diagrams, other illustrations.
Are numerical data statistically significant?
Are (statements about) results qualitative or quantitative?
Compare:
“Algorithm 1 is better” versus
“Algorithm 1 is 50% times faster in the mean”.
Mark unknown/relevant references for future reading.
Output of Phase 2
Outline, Reading, and
Literature Review
M. R. C. van Dongen
Outline
Assignments
Reading
Literature Review
Plagiarism
Summary You should be able to summarise the paper.
Usefulness You can tell whether the paper is useful.
Is it relevant?
Is it well written?
Does it appear sound?
Further Reading Do you understand assumptions & proof
techniques?
If not, read more & get back to the paper later.
Further Resources
Acknowledgements
References
Phase 3: Understanding
Outline, Reading, and
Literature Review
M. R. C. van Dongen
Outline
Assignments
Reading
Literature Review
Read the paper in full.
Make sure you understand everything.
Challenge every single assumption: is it reasonable/correct?
Follow the line of thought: does it make sense?
Re-implement the proofs:
Make sure the assumptions are correct.
Make sure you understand the proofs.
Make sure the proofs are correct.
Plagiarism
Further Resources
Acknowledgements
References
Literature Review: How to Start
Outline, Reading, and
Literature Review
M. R. C. van Dongen
Outline
Assignments
Talk to your supervisor(s).
They should know some starting points.
Read the papers suggested by your supervisor(s).
The bibliography provides information about relevant papers:
They’re the ones that you see over and over again.
Make sure you get these.
Get other relevant papers as well.
Usually, you may find them on the author’s homepage.
Sometimes you may find a different version: clearly indicate this
in your bibliography.
Visit key researchers’ home pages.
Do they have any interesting papers?
Where do they publish? Look there for further information.
Use http://citeseer.ist.psu.edu/.
Reading
Literature Review
How to Start?
Requirements
Submission Details
Grading Criteria
Plagiarism
Further Resources
Acknowledgements
References
Critical Reading, Classifying, Generalising
Outline, Reading, and
Literature Review
M. R. C. van Dongen
Outline
Assignments
Reading
Literature Review
Provide a comprehensive, critical overview of relevant work.
Critically compare existing works.
What do they have in common?
What are the differences?
Most things follow from this.
When you write, write for your peers.
If you didn’t understand X when you started your review:
Your may assume your peers won’t understand X.
Therefore, you should explain X.
How to Start?
Requirements
Submission Details
Grading Criteria
Plagiarism
Further Resources
Acknowledgements
References
Algorithmic Time Complexity Analysis
Outline, Reading, and
Literature Review
M. R. C. van Dongen
Define It
Outline
Assignments
Reading
Literature Review
How to Start?
Requirements
Submission Details
Grading Criteria
Plagiarism
Branch of research that studies classes of algorithms and the
relationship between the input of the members of these classes
and their execution time.
Further Resources
Acknowledgements
References
Algorithmic Time Complexity Analysis
Outline, Reading, and
Literature Review
M. R. C. van Dongen
Theoretic versus Experimental
Outline
Assignments
Reading
Literature Review
How to Start?
Requirements
Submission Details
Grading Criteria
Plagiarism
Theoretical Outcome is the result of theoretical analysis.
Experimental Outcome is the result of experimental comparison.
Further Resources
Acknowledgements
References
Algorithmic Time Complexity Analysis
Outline, Reading, and
Literature Review
M. R. C. van Dongen
Theoretic Analysis: Purpose
Outline
Assignments
Worst-case Provide a statement about the worst-case complexity.
Here we consider all possible input.
No assumptions made about distribution of input.
Says something about worst possible running time.
Usually, the result is expressed in terms of O(n),
where n is the size of the input.
Usually possible to give some result: it is [easier].
Expected Provide a statement about the expected time complexity.
Here we also consider all possible input.
Assumptions are made about distribution of input.
Says something about the expected running time.
Usually, the result is expressed in terms of
f (n) + o(n), where n is the size of the input.
Not always so easy to give results: it is [more
difficult].
Reading
Literature Review
How to Start?
Requirements
Submission Details
Grading Criteria
Plagiarism
Further Resources
Acknowledgements
References
Algorithmic Time Complexity Analysis
Outline, Reading, and
Literature Review
M. R. C. van Dongen
Theoretic Analysis: Purpose
Outline
Assignments
Worst-case Provide a statement about the worst-case complexity.
Here we consider all possible input.
No assumptions made about distribution of input.
Says something about worst possible running time.
Usually, the result is expressed in terms of O(n),
where n is the size of the input.
Usually possible to give some result: it is [easier].
Expected Provide a statement about the expected time complexity.
Here we also consider all possible input.
Assumptions are made about distribution of input.
Says something about the expected running time.
Usually, the result is expressed in terms of
f (n) + o(n), where n is the size of the input.
Not always so easy to give results: it is [more
difficult].
Reading
Literature Review
How to Start?
Requirements
Submission Details
Grading Criteria
Plagiarism
Further Resources
Acknowledgements
References
Algorithmic Time Complexity Analysis
Outline, Reading, and
Literature Review
M. R. C. van Dongen
Theoretic Analysis: Purpose
Outline
Assignments
Worst-case Provide a statement about the worst-case complexity.
Here we consider all possible input.
No assumptions made about distribution of input.
Says something about worst possible running time.
Usually, the result is expressed in terms of O(n),
where n is the size of the input.
Usually possible to give some result: it is [easier].
Expected Provide a statement about the expected time complexity.
Here we also consider all possible input.
Assumptions are made about distribution of input.
Says something about the expected running time.
Usually, the result is expressed in terms of
f (n) + o(n), where n is the size of the input.
Not always so easy to give results: it is [more
difficult].
Reading
Literature Review
How to Start?
Requirements
Submission Details
Grading Criteria
Plagiarism
Further Resources
Acknowledgements
References
Algorithmic Time Complexity Analysis
Outline, Reading, and
Literature Review
M. R. C. van Dongen
Theoretic Analysis: Purpose
Outline
Assignments
Worst-case Provide a statement about the worst-case complexity.
Here we consider all possible input.
No assumptions made about distribution of input.
Says something about worst possible running time.
Usually, the result is expressed in terms of O(n),
where n is the size of the input.
Usually possible to give some result: it is [easier].
Expected Provide a statement about the expected time complexity.
Here we also consider all possible input.
Assumptions are made about distribution of input.
Says something about the expected running time.
Usually, the result is expressed in terms of
f (n) + o(n), where n is the size of the input.
Not always so easy to give results: it is [more
difficult].
Reading
Literature Review
How to Start?
Requirements
Submission Details
Grading Criteria
Plagiarism
Further Resources
Acknowledgements
References
Algorithmic Time Complexity Analysis
Outline, Reading, and
Literature Review
M. R. C. van Dongen
Theoretic Analysis: Purpose
Outline
Assignments
Worst-case Provide a statement about the worst-case complexity.
Here we consider all possible input.
No assumptions made about distribution of input.
Says something about worst possible running time.
Usually, the result is expressed in terms of O(n),
where n is the size of the input.
Usually possible to give some result: it is [easier].
Expected Provide a statement about the expected time complexity.
Here we also consider all possible input.
Assumptions are made about distribution of input.
Says something about the expected running time.
Usually, the result is expressed in terms of
f (n) + o(n), where n is the size of the input.
Not always so easy to give results: it is [more
difficult].
Reading
Literature Review
How to Start?
Requirements
Submission Details
Grading Criteria
Plagiarism
Further Resources
Acknowledgements
References
Algorithmic Time Complexity Analysis
Outline, Reading, and
Literature Review
M. R. C. van Dongen
Theoretic Analysis: Purpose
Outline
Assignments
Worst-case Provide a statement about the worst-case complexity.
Here we consider all possible input.
No assumptions made about distribution of input.
Says something about worst possible running time.
Usually, the result is expressed in terms of O(n),
where n is the size of the input.
Usually possible to give some result: it is [easier].
Expected Provide a statement about the expected time complexity.
Here we also consider all possible input.
Assumptions are made about distribution of input.
Says something about the expected running time.
Usually, the result is expressed in terms of
f (n) + o(n), where n is the size of the input.
Not always so easy to give results: it is [more
difficult].
Reading
Literature Review
How to Start?
Requirements
Submission Details
Grading Criteria
Plagiarism
Further Resources
Acknowledgements
References
Algorithmic Time Complexity Analysis
Outline, Reading, and
Literature Review
M. R. C. van Dongen
Techniques Used
Outline
Assignments
Reading
Literature Review
How to Start?
Requirements
Submission Details
Grading Criteria
Plagiarism
Recurrence equations.
Probabilistic techniques.
Generating functions.
Further Resources
Acknowledgements
References
Tractability in Constraint Satisfaction
Outline, Reading, and
Literature Review
M. R. C. van Dongen
Define It
Outline
Assignments
Reading
Literature Review
How to Start?
Requirements
Submission Details
Grading Criteria
Plagiarism
Branch of research that studies classes of constraint satisfaction
problems that are tractable, i.e. classes that are decidable in a
time that is polynomial in the input size.
Further Resources
Acknowledgements
References
Tractability in Constraint Satisfaction
Outline, Reading, and
Literature Review
M. R. C. van Dongen
Different Restrictions
Outline
Assignments
Reading
Literature Review
How to Start?
Relations Any scope is allowed.
Main works based on polymorphisms.
Constraint languages either polynomial or np-hard.
Scope Any relation is allowed.
Main works based on consistency.
Time complexity is usually expressed as dk+α , where d
is the domain size, k the consistency level, and α a
constant.
Hybrid Mixture.
Ad-hoc.
Requirements
Submission Details
Grading Criteria
Plagiarism
Further Resources
Acknowledgements
References
Requirements
Outline, Reading, and
Literature Review
M. R. C. van Dongen
Outline
Assignments
Use a standard single column, 10 pt LATEX article.
Do not change the layout of the document.
Include title, name/id/email, supervisor’s name, date, and
abstract.
The abstract should not exceed 200 words.
Do not include table of contents, list of tables, list of figures, ….
Include introduction, main sections, conclusion, and
bibliography.
The bibliography should be prepared with BibTEX.
You are allowed no more than 10 pages.
The format of the final document should be .pdf.
You may use the review in your thesis.
More than likely, the thesis version will be different.
Reading
Literature Review
How to Start?
Requirements
Submission Details
Grading Criteria
Plagiarism
Further Resources
Acknowledgements
References
Submission Details
Outline, Reading, and
Literature Review
M. R. C. van Dongen
Outline
Assignments
Reading
Submit two printed copies and an electronic version.
Literature Review
How to Start?
The name of your supervisor should be on the cover page.
Submit printed copies to the departmental secretaries office.
Electronic submission involves the final .pdf output, all LATEX
and BibTEX input, and anything that is required to produce your
document.
It should not include auxiliary files.
Provide a build script.
The script should build the .pdf from LATEX and BibTEX sources.
The script should consist of a sequence of commands.
Submit the files electronically.
Requirements
Submission Details
Grading Criteria
Plagiarism
Further Resources
Acknowledgements
References
Criteria: Each Item Worth 5% of Final Grade
Outline, Reading, and
Literature Review
M. R. C. van Dongen
Technical Writing Criteria
Outline
Assignments
Abstract Does the abstract provide a concrete, proper preview of the review? Does it
provide a statement about the purpose of the work? Is there a summary of
results, findings, conclusions? Does it respect the word-count limit?
Scope Is the review thorough? Is the discussion relevant? Is it sufficient? Does it
present/discuss all relevant existing research?
Reading
Literature Review
How to Start?
Requirements
Submission Details
Grading Criteria
References Are proper references provided? Are the references relevant? Are they sufficient?
Is existing work acknowledged with a proper citation?
Technical writing It the writing presented in a top-down fashion? Is there a proper introduction
that outlines the main purpose of the work? Is there a summary of the main
results, findings, and conclusions? Is there a natural development of the
presentation of the main body of the text?
Originality Is the review original? Does it present original statements and findings? Is there
evidence of new insights and a fresh approach?
Analysis Does the review provide a critical analysis? Does it critically compare previous
works? Is there evidence of inductive reasoning: are general statements derived
from specific trends, statements, or facts? Is there evidence of deductive
reasoning: are specific statements derived from general trends, statements, or
facts.
English Is the English grammatical? Are there spelling errors? Is the spelling consistent?
Is there evidence a spell-checker was used?
Plagiarism
Further Resources
Acknowledgements
References
Criteria: Each Item Worth 5% of Final Grade
Outline, Reading, and
Literature Review
M. R. C. van Dongen
Document Preparation Criteria
Outline
Assignments
Reading
Literature Review
How to Start?
Requirements
Submission Details
Grading Criteria
Coherence Does the work have a coherent look and feel? Are sectional units, tables,
figures, and other document parts numbered and cross-referenced in a
consistent manner? Does the student make proper use of LATEX’s
cross-referencing mechanisms?
BibTEX Does the student make proper use of BibTEX?
Maintainability Is the LATEX implementation maintainable?
Plagiarism
Further Resources
Acknowledgements
References
From the ucc Pages
Outline, Reading, and
Literature Review
M. R. C. van Dongen
Outline
Assignments
Reading
Plagiarism: the presentation of someone else’s work as your own.
When done deliberately, it is cheating:
It is an attempt to claim credit for work not done by you;
Fails to give credit for the work of others.
Plagiarism applies to text, graphics, tables, formulae, ….
In some cases work can be plagiarised inadvertently:
This is usually due to carelessness and poor academic discipline.
Whether deliberate or inadvertent, plagiarism undermines
scholarship;
It is a form of academic misconduct.
The penalties for plagiarism are outlined in the Guide to
Examinations.
Literature Review
Plagiarism
Further Resources
Acknowledgements
References
Learning Technical Writing
Ramsey [2006a] provides “testable” principles of good writing.
Some coincide with what we studied today; some do not:
Consistent naming Use the same word for the same
notion; Use different words for
different notions.
Singular Use the singular form if you can. Helps
distinguishing one-to-one versus
n-to-m relationships.
Subject-verb separation Keep subject close to verb.
Information flow (Linkage and context.)
Emphasis Exploit the stress position.
Parallel structure Order text to highlight
relations/differences:
First we study X and Y in isolation.
Next we study X and Y in
combination.
…Having studied X and Y in isolation,
we now study them in combination.
Peyton Jones [2004] also provides useful tips for theses.
Outline, Reading, and
Literature Review
M. R. C. van Dongen
Outline
Assignments
Reading
Literature Review
Plagiarism
Further Resources
Teach Yourself
Writing Resources
English
Acknowledgements
References
More Writing Resources
Outline, Reading, and
Literature Review
M. R. C. van Dongen
Outline
Assignments
Reading
[American Mathematical Society 2002]: Manual for writers from
ams.
[Knuth, Larrabee, and Roberts 1987]: Text on mathematical
writing based on a course taught at Stanford.
[Halmos 1970]: Another great mathematical writing resource.
[Errors in Mathematical Writing]: A two-page guide on common
errors in mathematical writing. There is also a two page
adaptation: [Tips on Writing in Mathematics].
[van Leunen 1978]: The ultimate guide on references and
citations.
[How to Have Your Abstract Rejected] How not to write an abstract.
Literature Review
Plagiarism
Further Resources
Teach Yourself
Writing Resources
English
Acknowledgements
References
Language Resources
Outline, Reading, and
Literature Review
M. R. C. van Dongen
Outline
Assignments
Reading
[Thomson, and Martinet 1986a]: A brilliant English Grammar!
Comes with two exercise books [Thomson, and Martinet 1986b;
Thomson, and Martinet 1986c].
Literature Review
Plagiarism
Further Resources
Teach Yourself
Writing Resources
[Dupré 1998]: Get a feeling of good and bad English.
[Allen 2001]: Great punctuation reference guide.
[Trask 1997] Another good punctuation reference guide.
On-line Oxford English Dictionary:
http://dictionary.oed.com/.
On-line Merriam Webster English Dictionary:
http://www.m-w.com/netdict.htm.
English
Acknowledgements
References
Acknowledgements
Outline, Reading, and
Literature Review
M. R. C. van Dongen
Outline
Assignments
Reading
Literature Review
Plagiarism
Further Resources
Acknowledgements
The lecture is based on [Gopen, and Swan 1990] and on [Ramsey
2006a] and [Ramsey 2006b].
References
Bibliography I
Outline, Reading, and
Literature Review
M. R. C. van Dongen
Outline
Allen, Robert [2001]. Punctuation. Oxford University Press. isbn:
0-19-860439-4.
American Mathematical Society [2002]. Providence, RI. url:
Assignments
Reading
Literature Review
http://www.ams.org/bull/1943-49-03/S0002-9904-194307884-6/S0002-9904-1943-07884-6.pdf.
Plagiarism
Conrad, Keith. Errors in Mathematical Writing. url: http:
//www.math.uconn.edu/~kconrad/math216/mathwriting.pdf.
Acknowledgements
Dupré, L. [1998]. Bugs in Writing, a Guide to Debugging your Prose.
Addison – Wesley Professional.
Gopen, George D., and Judith A. Swan [1990]. “The Science of
Scientific Writing”. In: American Scientist 78.6, 550 – 558. url:
http://www.docstyles.com/library/ascience.pdf.
Halmos, Paul [1970]. “How to Write Mathematics”. In:
L’Enseignement Mathematique 16, 123 – 152. url:
http://retro.seals.ch/cntmng;jsessionid=
5D10D817325382AB2D2EB6EEF8E7A93A?type=pdf&rid=ensmat001:1970:16::59&subp=hires.
Further Resources
References
Bibliography II
Knuth, Donald E., Tracy L. Larrabee, and Paul M. Roberts [1987].
Mathematical Writing. The TEX sources of almost the entire book
are available from
http://www-cs-faculty.stanford.edu/~knuth/klr.html.
Digitized versions of videos of the lectures are available from
http://scpd.stanford.edu/knuth/. Mathematical Association
of America. isbn: 0-88385-063-x.
Peyton Jones, Simon [2004]. How to Write a Great Research Paper.
url:
http://research.microsoft.com/~simonpj/Papers/givinga-talk/writing-a-paper-slides.pdf.
Ramsey, Norman [2006a]. Learn Technical Writing in Two Hours per
Week. url: www.eecs.harvard.edu/~nr/pubs/learn.ps.
[2006b]. Teach Technical Writing in Two Hours per Week.
url: http://www.eecs.harvard.edu/~nr/pubs/two.pdf.
Thomson, A. J., and A. V. Martinet [1986a]. A Practical English
Grammar. Fourth Edition. Oxford University Press. isbn:
0-19-431342-5.
[1986b]. A Practical English Grammar, Exercises 1. Third
Edition. Oxford University Press. isbn: 978-0-19-431343-8.
Outline, Reading, and
Literature Review
M. R. C. van Dongen
Outline
Assignments
Reading
Literature Review
Plagiarism
Further Resources
Acknowledgements
References
Bibliography III
Outline, Reading, and
Literature Review
M. R. C. van Dongen
Outline
Assignments
Thomson, A. J., and A. V. Martinet [1986c]. A Practical English
Grammar, Exercises 2. Third Edition. Oxford University Press.
isbn: 978-0-19-431344-5.
Trask, R. L. [1997]. Penguin Guide to Punctuation. Penguin Books.
isbn: 0-140-51366-3.
Van Leunen, Mary-Claire [1978]. A Handbook for Scholars. Knopf.
isbn: 0-19-506954-4.
Van Leunen, Mary-Claire, and Richard Lipton. How to Have Your
Abstract Rejected. url:
http://www.cs.ucla.edu/~rupak/rejectedabstract.htm.
Zorn, Paul. Tips on Writing in Mathematics. url:
http://www.stolaf.edu/people/zorn/prooftips.pdf.
Reading
Literature Review
Plagiarism
Further Resources
Acknowledgements
References