 So, hello everybody. I'm going to go over a couple of things with you. Hopefully it will improve your work. So let me start off with a look at some titles. So I went to a Science Direct Journal. This one happened to be Energy. I just thought I'd go over and look at some of the titles that are in the current issue. So an updated review of recent advances on modification technologies in transcritical CO2 refrigeration cycle. An updated review of recent advances. So the problem with things like this is that in 10 years time, this title doesn't make a great deal of sense. So perhaps an updated 2020 or a view of advances until 2020 on technologies in transcritical CO2 refrigeration might be a better approach. Here's one you see a lot. Theoretical and experimental studies on the combustion mechanism of trans, 1, 3, 3, 3, et cetera, flora, prop 1e. The problem with that is not the combination of theoretical and experimental. I don't like the word studies. I think studies implies that you're really just looking around to see what happens and that's fine if you're in the very first, you know, endeavor for a field. But if you're the fourth, tenth PhD, you should really be focused on something very specific. So here I would just lead with combustion mechanism of blah, blah, blah, blah, using theoretical and experimental approaches. I don't like that because I don't know what the theoretical approaches are and some of us would only be interested in select ones and not others. So an improvement on density functional theory or REACS-FF would tell me what they're actually utilizing. Supercritical CO2 breaking cycle, a state-of-the-art review. Fine. That one. Predicting energy consumption and multi-decompositional ensemble approach might be interesting and of course the titles that are intended to be interesting. It should reflect the content of the topic though and so I would like to know are they doing energy consumption in China? Are we talking about cities? Are we talking about countries? Are we talking about transformations in climate change? More information would improve the title. Characterization of high temperature PCMs for enhancing passive safety and heat removal capabilities in nuclear reactor systems. Okay well I don't know what a PCM is. Maybe the readership of this journal would, in which case it would be absolutely fine. Remember this is a journal, not necessarily a report, but characterization, heat removal capabilities, just heat removal and nuclear reactors. Maybe perhaps systems might be fine if it's more broadly spread. So these are printed, accepted titles. You can see that there are opportunities to improve them and when you write your reports you should give an indication of the content and remember that it might be something that you would want to find in 10 years time when the economy has changed, when CO2 has value, when natural gas prices have changed. You might want to go back to an old report and the conclusions might have been back then. This was not economical to pursue at this time, but when things have changed you can go back find what you need and redo it and move forward. Here's another one. Experimental study on the flame stability and color characterization of cylindrical premixed perforated burner of condensing boiler by image processing method. It's a mouthful. It's flame stability and color characterization of a cylinder premixed perforated burner via image processing. It's simplified a little bit, but I get the sense I understand what that content of the paper is going to be and I might be interested in reading it. So that's what I want you to think about when you are doing titles. Okay, so let's get out of that. So we expect five things in an abstract. Hopefully by now you know what they are and I'm expecting it in this order. It's not that I want you to have five things in the abstract in any order. There is a very logical order given your defined audience. So the first thing I'm expecting to see will be how is the data utilized? What is an explanation of the value in doing this data characterization or capture and what is it going to inform? The second thing would be what your general approaches and your goals. Don't put in very specific information here like you used a leco, blah, bomb colorimeter. Be more generic. You're using a colorimeter to evaluate colorific values of biomass or calls or whatever you're doing. So the second component is this sort of goals and approach what you're trying to get to. And the third one is of course how you got there. So just enough basic information that someone knows what the basic approach is. And of course then I would say share some data. That's not universally accepted. Some journal articles they want you to purchase the entire article and so they hint and they dance around and it's a temptation. But in these reports that we're writing these technical reports you can put some of the data in. Don't put all the data in unless it's limited data. But you need to give some indication to back up what's going to happen next. And it shouldn't be trust me I'm an engineer so we're going to do this which we know examination evaluation analysis here's the data therefore these are the steps that we can do. So the fifth of course the most important piece is doing something meaningful for the data. Of course to do that you need to research and so if you've done research and you know how data is used if you know what the decision points are and you've got data the next obvious step is to utilize that in the decision-making process. And of course put yourself in the industry where they would use data. You're not a student and when you're writing these you're an employee of a company that would be measuring and utilizing the data. So that allows you to have a scenario that makes sense. So of course your defined audience is the boss's boss and that heavily influences your starting item and how much explanation you need and how much data you share. It's a very different approach when you write for other audiences. So in the real world I would love it when you write a report it gets approved initial by your immediate supervisor and then gets passed up the chain to the higher levels because that's what you really need to be doing. And so you may be asked to do something very specific which you need to understand how it's being utilized in the big picture and what your role is. So let me give you a minute to take a read of this abstract. So this is an actual published abstract and it starts off with a sentence on the introduction. So solid bitumen widely occurs in the strata and its reflectance is generally accepted indicator for thermal maturity. It doesn't tell you how thermal maturity is utilized but of course you would know that having taken chemistry of hydrocarbon fuels and just some other energy engineering related endeavors. And so obviously this is written for people who are in the field and who are likely to play with that data. So if we were writing this not a terrible introductory statement the boss's boss is probably somebody who would understand that the thermal maturity is a very useful parameter presumed here in the oil finding business or an oil company or a drilling company or something on those lines. So they use Raman to look at thermal maturity because they observed a lack of information. So they do a whole bunch of paralysis to get different maturations. The B is unnecessary here. I don't know why they have that. R0 is the more common parameter. Let me just get rid of make it easier to read and then talk about various Raman parameters. WD WD brand separation RBS full width half height WHD M-D and dash G and band intensity of these that's really the one that would be most known. I think it's fine to say they're doing band positions but as they're not really utilizing these acronyms heavily in the abstract I don't think it's necessary. I would have put the introduction of these components in the introduction rather than in the abstract because it makes it very difficult to read. The IDIG is a very commonly used ratio. The near-aggressions performed with a higher correlation selected that seems unnecessary. I would say that there were two parameters with high correlations and they had good faiths. Here is the significance. I believe that these Raman vector parameters will be a practical use in maturity assessments and so through that relationship if you're going to do these analyses you can get a good indication of thermal maturity. Fine things like that work. It might just be easier to do a reflectance and get a thermal maturity but these relationships can be very helpful. So question is who's the audience? It's aimed at people in the area in the field. It's not perhaps aimed at a peer because there's a little bit more explanation. It is certainly not aimed at someone who is not informed so it's not for a general audience. It's the sort of boss's boss perhaps indication. Not a particularly significant use of the data but this is research as opposed to technical report for another reason and so I think that's a fine endeavor. So like I say general improvements here. I don't think a lot of these acronyms aid the readability of documents and they could just be a little bit more succinct. So here's another one and I will again give you some time to read that paragraph. Okay so they start off very much on cold flow improves no explanation and so I believe that this is aimed very much appears other people who are interested in cold flow properties. It wouldn't be the boss's boss it's a peer or perhaps the most immediate boss who's given them the indication. So really this is a research article aimed at peers. They did viscosities of biodiesel and with cold improveers. They looked at a variety of properties. Was also determined seems unnecessary in addition seems unnecessary. We could go through and remove some of that language. I don't think that really it was calculated it was probably determined measured. I think in addition is particularly needed but also because it's in addition. I think finally is a necessary component as well. So let's get more succinct. Polarizing and these are techniques. I would have switched it around say and say crystal morphology and crystallization behavior was evaluated using polarizing microscopy and differential scanning carametry because it's what's they're thinking of techniques rather than what the techniques give for you. They say biodiesel unnecessarily because obviously we're talking about biodiesel. The results indicated that don't need that either. They say the PMA was the best candidate. Don't really give the data until a little bit further over here and so I would have put the data first and then indicated that that would be the best candidate. I don't like sentences beginning with acronyms. So I said the PMA essentially retarded essentially is unnecessary retarded crystal aggregation of the temperatures by our modification. So that's a not needed is this new sentence. So audience again it's a appear in this case. They're going jumping right in. You have to understand what's going on. What the challenges are is a third one. So we do have an introductory statement by Maastras or the amendment and we're particularly interested in this water holding capacity which of course very obviously is related to the pore volume and pore structure. But there's an attempt at that introductory piece. I really don't think these acronyms make things much easier to read and so I would not particularly use them. I do like the prop that they tell me that the samples how they were treated although it doesn't say for duration or heating rate which can be important. They're very much thinking of techniques. So titration, VMT, scanning electron microscopy. They move things around a little bit. So here they started for the technique and what gets you elsewhere they talk about what it gets you and the technique. So I always think that it's more appropriate to lead with the information and so I would go on with functional groups for obtaining via this bone titration surface area through the BET approach which is very common. I think you need to spell it out. It's like saying NMR nuclear magnetic resonance. It's university recognized. And then surface morphology via SEM. Then this volume average pore diameter and total porosity via mercury porosymmetry. What's determined seems a little unnecessary and could be removed like I say as can this acronym. I don't think we need to know what definition is being used because they're not at this point in time because they're not discussing any mesopause, macropause, macropause. And so if they were then that's appropriate to have in as they aren't it's not necessarily significant. There was positive correlation between the Charles and total pore volume. However, no obfuscation to surface area and the water holding capacity. Then they introduced this water absorption rate. Again I think that's unnecessary to talk about war. Obviously it's of Charles because that's what we're talking about. And of course that's an expected point as well. So the distribution used to explain the differences. So it hasn't told us the differences. It's a heating that you have to read the paper. I don't like that out of back that out of information up. And again this is a very obvious statement. So it's room for improvements I would say. But again these are research articles and it certainly looks like there's some interesting work going on in here. Now I did earlier collapse this and I want to open it up again. This ribbon has all sorts of really cool things including the ability to do some very interesting formatting to improve the quality of what you're going on. You should learn how to format and use these sorts of pieces to get more professional look for your papers. There's an excellent link in the canvas site and you've probably seen my comment saying that you should learn how to format. This is where it is. It's very easy to play with. Please take a look at it and improve your reports and your questions. Professionalism should be throughout. These are very trivial, easy things to do but has a big impact on how things look. I did also want to go over some tables. So if this happened to be a mean and a standard deviation then there's a couple of things that we should do. One is realize you can control the size of this and should make it be about the right size. I'm going to do some formatting and insert a column and I'm going to insert a column here as well and I'm going to control the spacing. If I had order of magnitude differences, that's maybe 156. It's very difficult to read when it's like this. Of course I've got mixtures of decimal places and so let's control that and show that we're in charge not excel. So let me turn on this piece. I'm going to make it a number and excel is going to want to go to two decimal places. I'm going to go to whatever I think is appropriate or whatever the ASTM tells me. Here I think one decimal place. Given the range here then one decimal place as well. So when I say put the mean and the standard deviation together on the same cell what I really mean is perhaps something like that where you can do the plus minus. Okay it doesn't like pluses and minuses. Fine. But the way I can control what's going on is if I right justify it then it's very easy to see orders of magnitude when they occur. Obviously this has been a little bit more ordered and so that's easier to read. And then when you make this throughout the right size, after you only put these cells around it and of course one of the things that is very nice to have in the review of this is the ability to go and do some appropriate formatting by themes. So when you do play around you have all sorts of abilities to control how things look and try and get them professional. You can pick the color schemes, you can pick the themes. Again very powerful, a good way to control how things look and making things be professional. You can also turn on the grid lines, change how things are viewed, etc. And that's very helpful in making a very cleaner look. When we play around a little bit, I've forgotten how to do apparently, you can make these tables look anyway. You should know how to apply themes and colors to get your tables to look better than this. And so you don't know how to do it, look it up. Apparently only know how to do it in some older formats. But over here in Format as a Table is where you have some interesting things that allow you to play. Anyway, that's all I wanted to hit today. So give some thought to how to improve your meeting your audience needs and your writing for your boss's boss. Give some thought to how to be a little bit more succinct and technical. Back up your assertions with some data because that aids in rationalizing how you got there. And then move forward. So things are starting to improve. I'm seeing some nice efforts and you are definitely getting better. So I don't always tell you the nice things. I tend to point out the things that could be improved. So there is progress and if you keep working, it's going to make a big difference on your future success. Anyway, have a good rest of your week.