The following guidelines present a consistent approach for preparing an academic document so it is easy to read and understand. The key point is using a consistent writing style throughout a document. Toggling among writing styles within a document may be grammatically correct, but it increases the burden for the reader to follow and understand the changing styles.

1. Do not use the first-person collective (royal) pronouns, e.g., we/our, in academic documents.

   We prove lemma 1 using our result from theorem 2.

   The plural pronouns in this sentence refer to the writer (speaker) and reader (listener). However, only the writer proved lemma 1 and the result from theorem 2 only belongs to the writer; therefore, why include the reader? This style is particularly misleading when there is a single author describing individual work. All sentences of this form can be rewritten without pronouns:

   Lemma 1 is proved using the result from theorem 2.

   Do not replace first-person plural collective pronouns with the third-person singular generic human pronoun "one".

   One can see the proof for lemma 1 results from theorem 2.

   All sentences of this form can be rewritten without the pronoun:

   The proof for lemma 1 results from theorem 2.

2. Clearly identify contributions, and do not be afraid to use the first-person singular (I/my) to accomplish this.

   I generalized Mulner's Banana-algorithm to include all tropical fruits.

   My patch for this problem is included in the Linux kernel.

   The following algorithm is new work but is based on Dicken's conjecture.

   If the reader cannot clearly differentiate prior work from new work, it is impossible to assess what has been accomplished.

3. Be consistent in the use of past/future tense.

   The algorithm was explained in Chapter 2.
   The algorithm will be explained in Chapter 4.

   Technically these sentences imply some temporal notion with respect to writing or reading. From the perspective of writing, the document is past tense. From the perspective of reading, the document is present tense, i.e., the reading is happening now. Hence, it is possible to go directly to Chapter 2 or Chapter 4 (physically) without waiting for the past or future. The sentences should read:

   The algorithm is explained in Chapter 2.
   The algorithm is explained in Chapter 4.

   The past/future tense is best used when discussing actions that have or have not happened.

   I was still able to conduct the experiments during the pandemic.
   I will attempt to extend algorithm 4 as part of my post-doctoral work.

   In general, use the present tense (is/are) in academic documents, which has the secondary benefit of not requiring past/future-tense updates when text is moved in the document.

4. Use the relative pronoun that to introduce a restrictive clause and which for a non-restrictive clause. A restrictive clause is defining and must appear to complete the thought of a sentence:

   A theory that has no proof is possible.

   The meaning of the sentence is trivial without the restrictive clause. A non-restrictive clause is parenthetical (optional) with respect to the thought of a sentence.

   A theory, which may or may not have a proof, is a systematic statement of rules or principles.

   The sentence is meaningful without the non-restrictive clause. A non-restrictive clause is always enclosed between commas.

5. A noun may have multiple modifying adjectives.

   The big oval red ball. The oval red big ball. The red big oval ball.

   In theory, the adjectives big, oval and red are independent and can be interchanged without altering the meaning. In practice, English adjectives are ordered according to: quantity, opinion, size, age, shape, color, origin/material. (Which adjective ordering above is correct?)

   When there are a number of independent adjectives, separating them with a comma makes reading easier.

   She decided to wear one, misunderstood, short, old, pleated, gray, denim, skirt.

   However, ordering adjectives according to the above rule is impossible when an adjective modifies another adjective and/or the noun is compound.

   The real time operating system failed. The time operating real system failed. The operating time real system failed.

   Here, the adjectives real and time are dependent and the noun operating system is compound; hence, these words cannot be interchanged without changing the meaning of this sentence. This sentence requires hyphens to bind together the adjectives and to construct the noun.

   The real-time operating-system failed.

   Note how the hyphen is used to disambiguate the following (assume lighthouse is two words): light house-keeping and light-house keeping.

6. Use between and among properly. Between is used for exactly two; among is used for more than two.

   The money is divided between Jane and Tom.

   The money is divided among the five winners.

7. Do not mix contractions with non-contractions in a technical document.

   I don't prove theorem 2 because I cannot.
   I do not prove theorem 2 because I can't.

   Be consistent.

   I did not prove theorem 2 because I cannot.

   In general, reserve contractions for narrative rather technical documents.

8. Use an explicit noun rather than an implicit back-reference after the word "this", as in:

   Termites can eat the foundation of a house. This causes the house to fall down.

   The subject in the second sentence is implicitly some event in the first sentence. It is better to be specific as to exactly what is the event being referenced, as in:

   Termites can eat the foundation of a house. This damage causes the house to fall down.

   When a prior event to obvious and the sentences are not too long, combine the sentences using "which".

   Termites can eat the foundation of a house, which causes the house to fall down.

9. While road-maps are a common idiom in technical writing:

   Chapter 1 presents the background work. Chapter 2 introduces an idea and talks about it. Chapter 3 introduces another idea and discusses it in detail, including an implementation. A further idea is presented in Chapter 4 along with its implementation. The work is summed up and conclusions presented in Chapter 5, along with some future work.

   try to reduce or eliminate them at the end of the introduction and at the start of each section. In general, this information has little or no value, and is largely ignored by a reader.

---