User:TimBorgNetzWerk/sandbox

Starting as an unstructured word collection, this eventually builds the structure for the academic thesis writing guide.

- see: Wikibooks:Reading room/General#Scientific writing guide (student thesis edition)

Keywords

• Caption above tables and below graphics
  • Caption above tables, code and ... | Caption below graphics
    • How do you cite edited and reconstructed graphics?
• Use PDFs over images wherever possible: Zoomable, searchable text, ...

\usepackage[english,german]{babel}

How to write in the Wiki

Links

Try to use the short-links: w:en:Precision_and_recall = https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Precision_and_recall

Note, apparently, the visual editor does some of this automatically already. Particularly around links, this is sometimes weird: - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Precision_and_recall

https://de.wikibooks.org/wiki/Hilfe:Links/_Interwiki-Links

Wiki-Structure

We need

1. a landing page where new people can arrive and note their interest. This should also allow them to drop their bits of knowledge, inputs, interests, ... - in whatever way, unstructured as it may be
   1. Especially for reference material, interesting links like https://academia.stackexchange.com/ etc.
2. A tool section / landing page, where you get send to if you click on any tool inside the book - like a glossary.
   1. Therin explain Tools like https://overleaf.com/, https://zotero.org/, https://orkg.org/, https://code.visualstudio.com/ - but just in terms of "how do i get the most out of them for my thesis" ...
3. A foundational section Methods and Measurements, e.g. what to do when you prepare / evaluate a survey, or validation in general. Keeping this really short, just to draw attention to what should be done. Extensive work can be linked to or created in addition.
   1. Statistics
      1. Precision and Recall https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Precision_and_recall Precision, Recall, Accuracy, F1 Score
      2. Inter-rater reliability https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inter-rater_reliability
      3. Fleiss' kappa https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fleiss%27_kappa https://datatab.de/tutorial/fleiss-kappa
      4. Krippendorff's alpha https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Krippendorff%27s_alpha https://real-statistics.com/reliability/interrater-reliability/krippendorffs-alpha/krippendorffs-alpha-basic-concepts/
   2. Survey
      1. Design
         1. NASA TLX Score https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NASA-TLX
         2. Scales of Measurement - Nominal, Ordinal, Interval, & Ratio Scale Data https://www.questionpro.com/blog/nominal-ordinal-interval-ratio/ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LuBD49SFpWs
         3. Likert Scale https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Likert_scale

Tools:

Trend towards Overleaf

Either Overleaf (online) or Visual Studio Code (local):

Overleaf

or

Visual Studio Code

+ a TeX distribution

MikTex + Strawberry Perl

See:

• Install Perl. You can use Strawberry Perl in Windows.
• If you don't have administrator privileges you can install the portable version and add the path to the executable to the PATH environment variable.
• Install MikTeX. The creator of LaTeX Workshop suggests to use TeX Live instead because it already comes with Perl and you could skip one step in this list. The disadvantages of using TeX Live instead of MikTeX are more (see here).

or

Ideas

Write the Wikibook itself in thesis style

We could write the whole book like a thesis:

1. Introduction
   1. Motivation
   2. Goal
      1. Research Goals/Questions
   3. Structure
2. Background
   1. Requirements
   2. Scientifc Method
   3. Tools
   4. Writing styles
      1. Citation
   5. Structuring the thesis
      1. Chapters
3. Related Work
   1. References, other guides
4. Approach Soft style break here. Technically, everyone should be satisfied with Background and Related work. The rest is for people interested in the project.
   1. ... ?
5. Validation How can we make sure this Book is high quality?
   1. Link to potential for feedback, addition, collaboration -
   2. request scientific evaluation,
   3. spread, ...
6. Results
   1. Actual feedback, findings, reviews
   2. Potential for personal additions
7. Discussion
   1. Reviewing the project and results
      1. Document internal discussions on a meta-layer
8. Conclusion
9. Future Work

This idea might be benefitial, but potentially, it could also break what the book is ment to be. In the end, most of why people will come here will be a sub-sub-chapter, and the layouting will be hurt because of it. Having those two things separate might - after all - be the better call.