Comparative analysis of conclusions and epilogues of scientific papers

Zhu Daming

(Editorial Department of Protection Engineering, 47 1023, Luoyang, Henan)

In view of the phenomenon of using the title of "conclusion" or "conclusion" at the end of sci-tech periodicals, this paper makes a comparative analysis of the conclusion and the content of the conclusion. It is considered that the concepts of "conclusion" and "conclusion" are different, and "conclusion" or "conclusion" should be used as the title of the corresponding part of the paper according to the actual content.

Scientific papers; Conclusion; Conclusion; Paper structure; Classification number G237G255.2 in the layout

Comparative analysis of "conclusion" and "conclusive mark" in Zhu Daming 12 scientific papers

Luoyang city, China, 47 1023.

From the basic content, composition structure and writing format of scientific papers

From the point of view, the main part of the paper generally begins with an introduction and ends with a conclusion (or discussion) [13]; Literature [45] also discusses the necessity of conclusions in scientific papers. In view of this problem, the author points out the difference between the concept of conclusion and conclusion, and suggests that "conclusion" and "conclusion" should be used as the hierarchical title of the conclusion part of the paper according to its actual content.

"Conclusion" or "conclusive marker" is a kind of expression of "conclusive marker", pointing out that "conclusion" and "conclusive marker" are different.

The "conclusion marker" in the concept. The level headings of "Conclusion" or "Summary Mark" should be used correctly.

apaperaccordingtoitsactualcontents。

sci 2； Scientific papers; Conclusion; Conclusion marker; Composition paper; Edit format science 2 techperoidicalsauthor's address

1 Papers in scientific journals end with "conclusion" and "conclusion"

Sampling statistical analysis of hierarchical titles

In order to investigate the use of "conclusion" and "conclusion" titles at the end of scientific papers, 16 scientific journals of different disciplines were randomly selected for statistical analysis, and the results are shown in table 1.

Editorial protection

Table 1 20051Statistics on the Use of "Conclusion" or "Conclusion" Titles in Six Sci-tech Journals

Journal of mechanical science

Journal of Building Structure, Journal of Civil Engineering, Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, Journal of Military Engineering, Journal of China Science (b) Journal of Tsinghua University, Journal of Tongji University, Journal of Electronic Science, Journal of Laser Optical Technology Microwave Processing, Journal of Water Conservancy, Journal of Metal.

Journal of Chemistry of China University

Year and quantity (period)

2005,37(2)2005,26( 1)2005,38( 1)2005,27(6)2005,26(3)2005,27( 1)2005,45(5)2005,33(5)2005,33(5)2005,2 1(4)2005,25(3)2005, 3 1(3)2005,2 1(3)2005,36(7)2005,4 1(8)2005,26(7)

Total number of papers

[***********][ 1**********] 15 1

Proportion of/%using "Conclusion" as a conclusive article

[***********][ 1**********]0

66.6755.0043.7572.0070.598 1.829 1.8958.6270.7366.6759.0982.2266.6675.00 100.0098.04

End with "conclusion"

Proportion of articles/%

[**************]0

1 1. 1 145.0043.7524.00 1 1.7602.7027.592 1.9522.229.098.89 16.6725.0000

There is no "conclusion" or "conclusion"

Proportion of articles/%

[**************] 1

22.220 12.504.00 17.64 18. 185.4 1 13.797.3 1 1 1. 1 13 1.8 18.89 16.6700 1.96

Note: Journal of Tsinghua University: Journal of Tongji University is a natural science edition.

The statistical results show that:

1) It is objective to use "conclusion" or "conclusion" as the title at the end of academic papers published in scientific journals;

2) The hierarchical title of scientific and technological academic papers ending with "conclusion".

(the average percentage is 72.42%), followed by "conclusion".

16.86%), a few papers use neither "conclusion" nor "conclusion"

(average 10.72%).

Based on this, it can be inferred that the hierarchical titles of "conclusion" and "conclusion" appear in the same kind of journals under the premise of unified layout and expression style of sci-tech journals, which shows that "conclusion" and "conclusion" are not synonyms.

Zhu Daming, No.2: Comparative analysis of conclusions and conclusions of scientific papers

2 "conclusion" and "conclusion" of the meaning and content of comparative analysis

(The meaning and content of Business 2 1 1 "Conclusion" was published by Modern Chinese Dictionary Publishing House in 2005) The definition of "Conclusion" is: 1) From the premise,

Main contents and research results, pointing out the shortcomings or limitations of this study, putting forward topics that need further study or pointing out the research direction, and clarifying them.

The value, significance and application prospect of the subject and research results, and the supplementary explanation of relevant suggestions and related contents. ; The objectivity of tone expression is weaker than the conclusion, and it is subjective.

Inference and judgment; 2) the final judgment of people or things. The English word for "conclusion" is conclusion. In scientific papers, conclusions are innovative, instructive, objective and universal conclusions based on the results obtained from theoretical argumentation, mathematical deduction, investigation and experimental research, and through strict logical reasoning to explain or understand the results. A detailed analysis of the papers ending with "conclusion" and the contents of the conclusion itself shows that it has the following characteristics:

1) research reports, experimental studies, theoretical derivation and other papers mostly end with "conclusions";

2) "Conclusion" theory;

3) The statement is rigorous and concise, or qualitative or quantitative.

;

4) The principle and universality revealed by important innovative research results are mainly expressed objectively, and the tone expression is more objective. 2 12 The meaning and content of "Conclusion" are explained according to Modern Chinese Dictionary.

That is, a meaningful passage at the end of an article or a formal speech, with a conclusion and conclusion. The English word for "conclusion" is concludingre2.

Mark.

Conclusion As the end of the whole article, we mainly consider the integrity of the structure and content of the article. Structurally, the conclusion can echo the introduction at the beginning, mainly expressing the summary and general discourse of the main content of the whole article; Conclusion cannot replace the final conclusion of academic research [6]. By analyzing the content and conclusion expressed in the paper, it is found that it has the following characteristics:

1) when the papers on special topics and comprehensive discussions are long, they usually end with "conclusion";

2) The experimental research paper also ends with a conclusion, mainly because the content of the conclusion has been stated in the "Results and Discussion", or the research results have not really reached a clear conclusion, and only necessary discussions have been conducted;

3) The conclusion is generally expressed in a piecemeal way and generally does not convey quantitative information; 4) The conclusion is broad, which is a summary, general statement or further explanation of the whole article, such as pointing out the topic again and summarizing this article.

3 Conclusion

1) Based on the hierarchical titles of "conclusion" and "conclusion" in sci-tech journals.

Through the investigation of usage and the analysis of specific content characteristics, we can think that "conclusion" and "conclusion" are not exactly the same concepts.

2) When writing and editing scientific papers, or take "conclusion" as the hierarchical title: "conclusion" as the hierarchical title; When there is no clear conclusion, or the conclusion has been expressed in the "Results and Discussion", it is necessary to summarize or further explain the full text, especially when expressing some subjective views or opinions of the author, it is more appropriate to use "Conclusion" as a hierarchical title.

3) It is suggested that the above contents should be supplemented and explained in the revision of the Specification for the Format of Sci-tech Papers, so as to make the content structure and format of periodical sci-tech papers more scientific and reasonable.

4 references

[1] GB/t 7713-1987 scientific and technological reports, dissertations and academic papers

[S]∥ Format prepared by Science and Technology Development Department of General Administration of Press and Publication, Book Publishing Management Department of General Administration of Press and Publication and China Standard Publishing House. The author edits the commonly used standards and specifications. Second edition. Beijing China Standards Publishing House 2003 354365.

[2] Li Xingchang. Normative expression of scientific papers: writing and editing [M]. Beijing: Qing

China University Press, 1995:47

[3] Chen Haoyuan. Standardization of sci-tech books and periodicals 18 [M]. Beijing: Beijing Normal University

News, 1998:69

[4] Qi Zhensheng, Yang Huasheng. Necessity and misunderstanding of conclusions in scientific papers.

[J]。 Acta editologica, 1999,11(2):10911.

[5] Yang Huasheng, Liu Yanqin, Pan Xiuhua, et al. Re-discussion on the necessity of conclusions of scientific papers.

Sex: Also discuss with Mr. Gao Lushan [J]. Acta editologica, 2004, 16(5):386.

[6] Feng Changgen. Academic editors should shoulder the historical responsibility of scientific and technological innovation [J]. part

Technical Bulletin, 23, 2005 (5): 69

(200508 10 received; 2005 1008 maintenance)

How to record and quote multiple documents at the same time in the author's publication year system?

Question: How to record references with the author's publication year system, and how to record references when citing multiple documents at the same time?

A: GB/T77 14—2005 has no provisions on this. Regarding the method of marking the author's publication year when quoting 1, we suggest:

In order to indicate the publication years of several groups of authors in brackets at the same time, and add a semicolon ";" In front of each group of authors. .

For example: ...

Zhang XX, 2003. ..... (Li X et al., 2004; Wang xx,

2005; Chen XX et al., 2005). ……

(Chen Duan)