oleg.petruny/bachelor-thesis
2
0
Fork 0
Code Pull Requests Actions Releases Activity

fix mistakes

Browse Source
This commit is contained in:
Mirek Kratochvil 2020-05-12 21:11:09 +02:00
parent 7488e37ce9
commit 85784569ce
3 changed files with 8 additions and 6 deletions
Show Stats Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

BIN
build/thesis.pdf
View File

Binary file not shown.

2
ch1.tex
View File

@ -28,7 +28,7 @@ There are several main commands for inserting citations, used as follows:
\begin{itemize}
\item \citet{knuth1979tex} described a great system for typesetting theses.
\item We are typesetting this thesis with LaTeX, which is based on TeX and Metafont~\cite{knuth1979tex}.
\item The TeX was actually expanded to LaTeX by \citet{lamport1994latex}.
\item TeX was expanded to LaTeX by \citet{lamport1994latex}, hence the name.
\item Revered are the authors of these systems!~\cite{knuth1979tex,lamport1994latex}
\end{itemize}

12
ch3.tex
View File

@ -8,8 +8,8 @@ Instead, try some of the following:
\item Show plots with measurements that you did to prove your results (e.g. speedup). Use either \texttt{R} and \texttt{ggplot}, or Python with \texttt{matplotlib} to generate the plots.\footnote{Honestly, the plots from \texttt{ggplot} look \underline{much} better.} Save them as PDF to avoid printing pixels (as in \cref{fig:f}).
\item Compare with other similar software/theses/authors/results, if possible
\item Show example source code (e.g. for demonstrating how easily your results can be used)
\item Include a `toy problem' for demonstrating the basic functionality of your approach and detail all important properties and results on that.
\item Include clear pictures of `inputs' and `outputs' of all your algorithms, if applicable.
\item Include a `toy problem' for demonstrating the basic functionality of your approach and detail all important properties and results on that
\item Include clear pictures of `inputs' and `outputs' of all your algorithms, if applicable
\end{itemize}
\begin{figure}
@ -21,17 +21,19 @@ Instead, try some of the following:
It is sometimes convenient (even recommended by some journals, including Cell) to name the results sub-sections so that they state what exactly has been achieved. Examples follow.
\section{SuperProgram is faster than naive OldAlgorithm}
\section{SuperProgram is faster than OldAlgorithm}
\subsection{Scalability estimation}
\subsection{Precision of the results}
\section{Weird theorem is proven by induction}
\section{Amount of code reduced by CodeRedTool}
\subsection{Example}
\subsection{Performance on real codebases}
\section{NeuroticHelper improves neural network learning}
\section{What is a discussion?}
After you present the results and showing that your contribution works, it is important to \emph{interpret} them, showing what they mean for the more general public. Separate discussion sections are common in life sciences where ambiguity is common and intuition is sometimes the only thing that the authors have; exact sciences and mathematicians do not use them as often.
After you present the results and show that your contribution works, it is important to \emph{interpret} them, showing what they mean for the more general public.
Despite of that, it is nice to precisely set your output to the environment, answering:
Separate discussion sections are common in life sciences where ambiguity is common and intuition is sometimes the only thing that the authors have; exact sciences and mathematicians do not use them as often. Despite of that, it is nice to precisely set your output into the existing environment, answering:
\begin{itemize}
\item What is the potential application of the result?
\item Does the result solve a problem that other people encountered?