Should I cite a result if the paper doesn't include a proof?

↧

Answer by anon for Should I cite a result if the paper doesn't include a proof?

January 6, 2021, 1:53 pm

Could you just give the reader an idea of the tediousness by showing just a part of the proof?Maybe showing the verbosity of just one part of it is the best way to convince any reader that your...

View Article

Answer by Noah Snyder for Should I cite a result if the paper doesn't include...

September 22, 2017, 6:18 am

Cite the paper when you state the lemma. Then write:\begin{proof}Split up the domain of integration to remove absolute values, then evaluate each of the parts.\end{proof}It's a waste of everyone's time...

View Article

Answer by Peter for Should I cite a result if the paper doesn't include a proof?

September 21, 2017, 6:57 am

I suggest not including the proof in your paper.If you need to, cite the other paper which states the lemma Then, since you have determined that the proof is "obvious", simply state that.For...

View Article

Answer by Jessica B for Should I cite a result if the paper doesn't include a...

September 20, 2017, 4:13 am

If the result is basically trivial (as you say it is), I think how you proceed should consider how standard this type of result would be in the field.You could put something like:The following result...

View Article

Answer by Wildcard for Should I cite a result if the paper doesn't include a...

September 21, 2017, 3:37 am

Just say you have discovered a truly marvelous proof for it that won't fit in the confines of your paper's length restrictions. ;)No one will mind, right? They can always work out the proof that you...

View Article

Answer by Arno for Should I cite a result if the paper doesn't include a proof?

September 19, 2017, 3:26 pm

Citing the other paper seems necessary in any case, as they have stated the lemma before you. This is for attribution. Citing the other paper for evidence seems not appropriate, as there is no proof...

View Article