Are there some criteria or characteristics common to these kind of papers? Are there some elements or characteristics that an overview, review or state of art should meet in order to deserve publication? What elements or parameters are considered on each case? What characteristics give a better quality to them?
Primary on engineering.
It is not about quality, but their purpouses.
A State of Art paper tries to report the newest stuff about a subject. This is important because some PHD thesis must be out of the state of art.
A Review reports the main subjects (not exactly thje newest. Can be the most populars).
And a Overview is not only a report, but a critical report with opinions and tendencies.
For sure my collegues here can disagree. This is only one point of view.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Papers