◄Back

# Long description

An image of a PDF of Keshav’s paper showing annotations added by the author. The annotations can be described as follows.

At the top of the paper are two sets of comments:

- ‘21/12/12: From abstract and skim read, looks a good introduction to reading an academic paper. MAY BE most useful to a peer reviewer, however.’

- ‘First read: 21 December 2012’

  ‘Second read: 23 December 2012’

  ‘Third read: 15 January 2013’

Other annotations are as follows:

- In the Introduction section the following phrases are highlighted: ‘to review them for a conference or a class’; ‘keep current in their field’; ‘Learning to efficiently read a paper is a critical but rarely taught skill’. In the margin alongside this highlighting an annotation reads ‘23/12/12 Two appropriate reasons’
- In the Introduction section the phrase ‘are frequently driven to frustration’ is highlighted and in the margin an annotation reads ‘23/12/12: We’d like to avoid’
- Alongside the section 2 heading an annotation reads ‘23/12/12 A good workflow’
- In section 2 the paragraph from the words ‘Each pass’ onwards is highlighted. The associated marginal note reads ‘15/01/13: we say it may take many i.e. more that [sic] three passes’
- In subsection 2.1 the sentence starting ‘This pass’ is highlighted and the accompanying annotation reads ‘15/01/13: 5 mins! discipline needed’
- In subsection 2.1, point 3, the word ‘conclusions’ is highlighted; the accompanying note reads ‘23/12/12: Not all papers have conclusions (including this one)’
- In subsection 2.1 before the second list the term ‘five Cs’ is highlighted with an accompanying annotation reading ‘15/01//13
- In subsection 2.1 the words ‘choose not to read further’ are highlighted and the accompanying annotation reads ‘23/12/12: a first pass may not be enough to know this’
- In subsection 2.1 the words ‘someday prove relevant’ are highlighted and the accompanying annotation reads ‘15/01/13: ok, of relevance someday’
- Alongside the first paragraph in section 2.2 an annotation reads ‘15/01/13: how to deal with new nomenclature?’
- In subsection 2.2, point 1, the sentence ‘Common mistakes like these will separate rushed, shoddy work from the truly excellent’ is highlighted and the accompanying annotation reads ‘15/01/13: interesting point, quick markers for poor work’