Submitting another person's work in any form

Quoting directly or nearly verbatim without proper acknowledgment

Misrepresenting someone else's ideas as one's own

Citing a source correctly with quotation marks

Adopting another's line of thought or argument without giving credit

Not taking notes -> write down key points, questions, and critiques

Reading irrelevant papers -> skim first to assess relevance

Reading line by line -> use the three-pass approach instead

Getting stuck on details -> skip technical details initially, return in the 3rd pass

Forgetting citation styles -> always use numeric citations

Choose the most relevant source

Use primary sources for specific findings, reviews for synthesis

Include the most recent source

Prefer accessible, reliable, peer-reviewed sources

Always cite the longest available paper

Give credit to the earliest source

A widely accepted claim (e.g., 'gradient descent is commonly used to optimize neural networks')

A claim that readers might question

A factual claim that is easily checked

A claim showing controversy in the field

A method standard in the field (e.g., ReLU, k-means)

Accessible/colorblind-safe palettes

Clarity: readable at a glance

As many colors as possible for visual interest

Low clutter: few colors, no extras

Consistency in fonts, sizes, and styles

Self-contained with labels, legend, and units

Nominalizations (e.g., 'achieve a reduction in length')

Using short, simple sentences

Tautologous modifiers (e.g., 'blue in color')

Long words (e.g., 'utilize' instead of 'use')

Excessive metadiscourse

Excessive hedging

Active voice fully avoids any need for grammar rules

It is clearer, more engaging, and direct

Passive voice is now banned by all journals

It has been the preferred style in journals over the last 20 years

It is often shorter and less complex