Chapter 2 : Literature Review and Technical Reading The primary goal of literature review isto know the use of content/ideas/approaches in the literature to correctly identify the problem that is vaguely known beforehand, to advocate a specific approach adopted to understanding the problem, and to access the choice of methods used. It also helps the researcher understand clearly that the research to be undertaken would contribute something new and innovative. The qual- ity of such review can be determined by evaluating if it includes appropriate breadth and depth of the area under study, clarity, rigor, consistency, effective analysis. 2.1 New and Existing Knowledge New knowledge in research can only be interpreted within the context of what is already known, and cannot exist without the foundation of existing knowledge. In this chapter, we are going to look at how that foundation of knowledge needs to be constructed so that our new knowledge is supported by it. The new knowledge can have vastly different interpretations depending on what the researcher's back ground, and one’s perception of that new knowledge can change from indifference to excitement (or vice versa), depending on what else one knows. The significance can normally be argued from the point of view that there is indeed an existing prob- tem and that itis known by looking at what already exists in the field. The existing knowledge is needed to make the case that there isa problem and that itis important, One can infer that the knowledge that is sought to be produced does not yet exist by describing what other knowledge already exists and by pointing out that this part is missing 50 that what we have is original. To do this, one again needs the existing knowledge: the context, the significance, the originality, and the tools. Where does this existing knowledge come from? Normally, one finds this knowledge by reading and surveying the literature in the field that was established long ago and also about © Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019 D, Deb etal. Engineering Research Methodology, 9 Intelligent Systems Reference Library 153, httpsi/doi.org/10.1007/97 8-981-13-2947-0_2 © scanned with OKEN Scanner10 2 Literature Review und Technical Reading. the more recent knowledge which isin fact always changing. With this foundation in place, the new knowledge that one will make will be much more difficult to challenge than without that strong foundation in place which is ensured with lots of references to the literature, Often, but not alwa ‘8, the textbooks contain the older established knowledge and the research papers the newer work, Reading the textbooks on one’s topic provide the established knowledge and the background to be able to read the newer work usually recorded in the research papers. Very often, reading a textbook is not too difficult for itis written as a teaching instrument, and the author of the textbook normally starts from the basies and take the reader, through everything that one needs to be able to ‘understand that topic. This is not at all the case with a research paper where the goal is normally to present u small piece of new knowledge, and that new knowledge will ot have stood the test of time in the sume way as the knowledge in a textbook would have. The research paperis written for other researchers outon the edge of knowledge and it assumes that the reader already knows a lot in that field. A researcher may find oneself continually going back to other sources to try and interpret what is going on in a particular research paper. It can be difficult to find the right work to read, but the objective with all this reading and learning is to be able to get the knowledge that ‘one needs to build the foundation. The review process must explain how a research item builds on another one U1). This is because useful research should elucidate how and why certain technical development took place, so that itis easy for the reader to comprehend why the present talk is being undertaken, and a good literature survey would provide a convincing under to that question. An effective review of literature ensures a firm foundation for advancing knowledge, facilitates theoretical growth, eliminates as areas that might be of interest, and opens new avenues of possible work. An efficient literature review is centered around concepts and not authors (2). Generally, a good literature survey is the first expectation of a supervisor from the research student, and when one well can create a good impression that the state of art in the chosen field is well understood. Simple rules for writing an effective literature review are important for a research scholar, are provided [3, 4]. A good literature review would not draw hasty conclusions and look into the individual references to determine the underlying causes/assumptions/mechanisms in each of them so as to synthesize the available information in a much more meaningful way. A literature review should be able to summarize as to what is already known from the state of the art, detail the key concepts and the main factors or parameters and the underlying relationships between those, describe any complementary existing approaches, enumerate the inconsistencies or shortcomings in the published work, identify the reported results that are inconclusive or contradictory, and provide a compulsive reason to do further work in the field. A good literature survey is typically a two-step process as enumerated below: (i) Identify the major topics or subtopics or concepts relevant to the subject under consideration, © scanned with OKEN Scanner2.1 New and Existing Knowledge " i) Place the citation of the relevant source (article/patent/website/data, etc.) in the correct category of the concept/topic/subtopic (with the help of a v, for example). Tteould be that as one is reading and comes across something that one considers to be very important for one’s work, a core principle or a description of something that just sounds really good, and one is excited to have found it. Naturally, one highlights that section or underlines it, or put an asterisk in the margin, so that one could come back to it later, Effectively, one is saying that it is important and hence the marking so as not to forget it After having marked or highlighted the section, it is suggested that the paper be put away or the book be closed. Then one should write about the highlighted part without copying it. As one writes about why one thinks that part is important and what it contains, one is automatically changing it and making it fit into one’s foundation in the way that makes sense. There are shaping and crafting of that piece of knowledge to fit where one needs it to be. To build the knowledge foundation, one needs to be reading and learning continually. But that is not enough, one also needs to be writing about what one has read. A comprehensive literature survey should methodically analyze and synthesize quality archived work, provide a firm foundation to a topic of interest and the choice of suitable research methodologies, and demonstrate that the proposed work would make a novel contribution to the overall field of research. 2.2. Analysis and Synthesis of Prior Art After collecting the sources, usually articles, intended to be used in the literature review, the researcher is ready to break down each article and identify the useful content in it, and then synthesize the collection of articles (integrate them and identity the conclusions that can be made from the articles as a group) [5]. A literature survey gtid of N topics and M sources is shown below to help crystallize the information in different categories, ‘A researcher should analyze the relevant information ascertained in Table 2.1 by undertaking the following steps: (i) Understanding the hypothesis, (ii) Understanding the models and the experimental conditions used, iii) Making connections, (iv) Comparing and contrasting the various information, and (v) Finding out the strong points and the loopholes. It is always good to be suspicious of the claims made in the sources that have been thoroughly reviewed, especially in the case of tall claims. If one is amenable to easily accept whatever is available in the literature, one may find it difficult to go © scanned with OKEN Scanner2 Literature Review und ‘Teetnicul Reading ‘Table 21 survey grid The literature beyond it in one’s own work and may also fail to carefully analyze with a suspicious bent of mind one’s own results subsequently. The goal of literature survey is to bring out something new to work on through the identification of unsolved issues, determine the problems in the existing models or experimental designs, and present a novel idea and recommendations. No matter where one gets the available information, one needs to critically evaluate each resource that the researcher wishes to cite. This methodology analyzes available materials to determine suitability for the intended research, Relying on refereed articles published in scholarly journals or granted patents can save the researcher a lot of time. Here are a few criteria that could help the researcher in the evaluation of the information under study: ¢ Authority: What are the author's credentials and affiliation? Who publishes the information? * Accuracy: Based on what one already knows about the topic or from reading other sources, does the information seem credible? Does the author cite other sources in a reference list or bibliography, to support the information presented? ‘* Scope: Is the source at an appropriate comprehension or research level? There are other criteria to consider as well, such as currency, objectivity, and purpose. It is important to ensure that the search question is neither too narrow nor too broad. 2.3 Bibliographic Databases “Bibliographic databases” refer to “abstracting and indexing services” useful for collecting citation-related information and possibly abstracts of research articles from scholarly literature and making them available through search. Performing simultaneous searches through such large databases may allow researchers to overtly rely on any one database and be limited by the intrinsic shortcoming of any one of them for quality research [6]. A researcher should be able to quickly identify the © scanned with OKEN Scanner2.3 Bibliographic Databases yl atabases that are of use in the iden or problem that one wishes to explore, In this section, we present some details ubout a few of the popular bibliographic databases ‘Mos! sought after by engineering researchers, but do not attempt to provide exhaustive details, 2.3.1 Web of Science ‘Web of Science (formerly known as IST or Thomson Reuters) includes multiple databases, as well as specialized tools, Its a good search tool for scholarly materials ‘equiting institutional license and allows the researcher to searchin a particular topic oF interest, which can be made by selection in fields that are available in drop down menu such as ttle, topic, author, address, etc. The tool also allows sorting by number f citations (highest to lowest), publication date,! Put quotes around phrases, ad more keywords, oruse the “Refine Results” panel onthe left to narrow down the search by keyword, phrases in quotation marks, type of Mra tial such as peer-reviewed journal aicles, date, language, and more, Expanding the search results is possible by looking for alternate word endings, breaking the Search concepts down, thinking of alternate search terins (including scientific names if applicable) and connecting them with OR, and using the database's features for Finding additional references, “Cited reference search” option enables a researcher i0 tee articles which have cited a formerly published paper. Using this element, iis possible to find how a familiar idea has been applied, improved, or extended subsequently. A Structured search like this that enables narrowing and refining what one is looking for is effective to ensure thatthe results throw up relevant soutoes and time Spent in studying those is ikely to be wel utilized. Based on the researcher's need the search result can be broadened or narrowed down u using the built-in fields provided in this website, When clicked on any ofthe search results, tis website provides the ttle of the paper, authors, the type of journal, volume, issue mumber and year of Publication, abstract, keywords, etc. so thatthe researcher has enough information ‘0 decide if it is worthwhile to acquire the full version of the paper. 2.3.2 Google and Google Scholar eports from governments, However, there are limitations: ae "hpsillaivatecom/produets/web-of science! © scanned with OKEN ScannerW 2° Literature Review und Technical Reading {0 Ws a “black box” of information, tt searches everything on the Internet, with ii) ae ually control—one does not kuiow where resulis are coming from, id) There are limited search functionality and fefinement options, What about Google Scholar? Google Schol 7 lar limits one's search to scholarly literature. However, there are limitations: '. Some ofthe results are not actually scholaly, An aticle may look scholarly a first glance, but is not a good source upon further inspection, 2. This not com prehensive. Some publishers do not make their content available to Google Scholar, 3, There is limited search functionality and refinement options. There are search operators that can be used to help narrow down the results. These help one find more relevant and useful sources of information. Operators can be combined within searches. Here are some basic ones that one can use: @) OR—Broadens search by capturing synonyms or variant spellings of a concept. Example: Synchronous OR asynchronous will find results that have either term present. (ii) Brackets/Parentheses ()—Gather OR'd synonyms of a concept together, while Combining them with another concept. Example: RAM (synchronous OR asyn- chronous). ii) Quotation marks “"—Narrow the search by finding words together as a phrase, instead of separately, Example: RAM (synchronous OR asynchronous) “Texas Instruments”, iv) Site—limits the search to results from a specific domain or website. This oper- ator is helpful when searching specific websites such as the BC government, which is Example: RAM (synchronous OR asynchronous) “Texas Instruments” site: http://ieeexplore.icee.org, (v) Filetype—iimits the search to results with a specific file extension one could look for pdf’s, PowerPoint presentations, Excel spreadsheets, and so on, Exam- ple: RAM (synchronous OR asynchronous) “Texas Instruments” site: http:// ieeexplore.ieee.org, filetype: pdf. The Search Tools button at the top of the Google results gives you a variety of other options, such as limiting the results by date. There are other operators and tools that one can use in Google and Google Scholar. Google is but one search tool a researcher can use—it is not the only one! Ttcan be hard to sift through all the results in Google or Google Scholar, especially if the intent is to find scholarly resources from a specific subject area, To find the best resources on a topic, one should search in academic databases, in addition to Google. Databases provide access to journal articles and conference proceedings, as well as other scholarly resources, One gets more relevant and focused results, because they have better quality control and search functionality. One should choose a database based on subject area, date coverage, and publication type. Interfaces vary between databases, but the search techniques remain essentially the same. © scanned with OKEN Scanner2.4 Bifective Search: The Way Forward 2.4 Effective Search: The Way Forward A scholarly Publication is one wherein the published outcome is authored b Fesearchers in a Specific ficld of skill. Such work cites all source cont d 4 is generally peer reviewed for accuracy and validity by © contents used and the audience for sucht een aed and validity before publication, Essentially, is typically move h works is fellow experts and students in the field. The content ‘Complex and advanced than those found in general magazines, lenny most the engineering researchers need to refer articles that appear in ae — “mals, books or other peer-reviewed sources, there is also a substantially i matent in more popular publications. These are informal in approach and aim ‘0 reach a large number of readers including both the experts in the filed and also Amateurs, but the content focuses on news and trends in the field. Research outcomes are not typically first disseminated here but are usually meant for general reading. A researcher should use all search tools for comprehensive search. No one place OF one source exists that will provide all the information one needs; one will likely need to look in all the places that would be described in this chapter and in others. not mentioned, A researcher must consider what type of information is needed, and where it could be found. Not all information is available online. Some information is only available in print. It can take time for scholarly and peer-reviewed information to be published. One might not be able to find scholarly information about something currently being reported in the news. The information may not be available, or studies on a topic of interest to the researcher have not occurred. In such a case, the researcher should look for similar studies that would be applicable to the specific topic; look for broad information (general process, technology, etc.), as well as information that addresses the specific context of the researcher's report, Searching is an itera ve process: ¢ Experiment with different keywords and operators; ¢ Evaluate and assess results, use filters; ‘© Modify the search as needed; and © When relevant articles are found, look at their citations and references. After the search is complete, the researcher needs to engage in eritieal and thor- ough reading, making observation of the salient points in those sources, and summa- tize the findings. A detailed comparison and contrast of the findings is also required to be done. This entire process may be needed to be done multiple times. The con- clusion of the entire process of literature survey includes a summary of the relevant and important work done, and also the identification of the missing links and the challenges in the open problems in the area under study. One must note that the literature survey is a continuous and cyclical process that may involve the researcher going back and forth till the end of the research project. Not many people begin research work in their graduate program with an already acquired skill to efficiently parse math-heavy articles quickly, but those who eventu- ally succeed in an engineering research career quickly develop that skill from reading © scanned with OKEN Scanner16 2 Literature Review and Technical Reading a lot of papers, seeking help in understanding confusing parts, and getting through relevant coursework to build up the required skills and intuition. It is very important to not lose sight of the purpose of an extensive search or literature survey, for it is possible to spend a very significant amount of one’s time doing so and actually falsely think that one is working hard. Nothing will come of it unless one is an active reader and spends sufficient time to develop one’s own ideas build on what one has read. It is not as if literature survey ends and then research begins, for new literature keeps appearing, and as one’s understanding of the problem grows, one finds new connections and related/evolving problems which may need more search. It is mandatory for a Ph.D. scholar to write a synopsis of the topic and submit it to the doctoral committee for approval. During this stage, the scholar needs to undertake an extensive literature survey connected with the problem. For this purpose, the archived journals and published or unpublished bibliographies are the first place to check out. One source leads to another. @ scanned with OKEN Scanner