dagger-research/papers
Mark Spanbroek 87bddba53c Added evaluation of Sui 2022-09-26 10:10:56 +02:00
..
Compact_Proofs_of_Retrievability S&W PoR (#69) 2022-05-10 09:31:13 -06:00
Economics_of_BitTorrent_communities Adding review of Bittorrent Economics paper (#81) 2022-05-25 20:35:47 -06:00
Falcon_Codes_Fast_Authenticated_LT_Codes add initial summary of Falcon Code paper (#78) 2022-06-08 17:34:36 -06:00
Filecoin_A_Decentralized_Storage_Network Adding review of the Filecoin paper (#80) 2022-05-25 13:40:57 -06:00
Peer-to-Peer_Storage_System_a_Practical_Guideline_to_be_lazy Adding review of Lazy Repair paper (#82) 2022-05-26 14:21:23 -06:00
Sui Added evaluation of Sui 2022-09-26 10:10:56 +02:00
README.md Updating index with new additions 2022-05-30 16:42:40 -06:00
template.md adding paper summaries (#68) 2022-05-10 09:28:49 -06:00

README.md

Paper Summaries

This directory contains academic paper summaries explored as part of the Codex project research. It is structured as a list of links to a document containing a quick summary and observations extracted from the paper. The summaries aren't meant to be exhaustive and cover all aspects of the paper but rather serve as a quick refresher and a record of the papers already evaluated.

Index

Writing Summaries

A summary should contain a brief overview of the core ideas presented in the paper along with observations and notes.

Template

A template is provided that outlines a few sections:

  • Title - the title of the paper
  • Authors - the authors of the paper
  • DOI - the digital object identifier of the paper
  • Links - an optional section with links to the paper and other relevant material, such as source code, simulations, etc... If the paper is uploaded to the repo, it should be linked here as well.
  • Summary - a quick summary capturing the main ideas proposed by the paper
  • Main ideas - an optional list of bullet points describing the main ideas of the paper in more detail
  • Observations - an optional list of bullet points with observations if any
  • Other ideas - an optional list of bullet points with additional observations

Directory Structure

Each evaluation should go into it's own directory named after the paper being evaluated. It should contain a README.md with the actual evaluation and additional supporting material such as the paper itself, if one is available; or relevant code samples if those are provided. For example, the Shacham and Waters - Compact Proofs of Retrievability directory structure would look something like this:

├── Compact\ Proofs\ of\ Retrievability
│   └── README.md
|   └── Compact\ Proofs\ of\ Retrievability.pdf