I can imagine that many of the users of this website are PhD students in various research fields. I would like to have a list of published articles which used MMA to get their results or used MMA to plot their data. It would be good to have such a list ordered by research field category. I don't know if the codes used in those articles would be available or not( I guess it should be ).

In this way, you might get a better help when you want to do something in your research field by reading those articles and possibly get an understanding of how to implement your work. At the least, you might be able to reproduce the result of those articles and use that programming experience to work on your project.

Even if there is not an article which used MMA but you reproduced the result by MMA, it would be good to mention the article and the source code of course. I think at the least we will have a perspective of what can be done by MMA in different research fields.

Let me elaborate more. For example, people who are working on the excitation energy transfer in chlorosomes might read this article and see this figure and they might want to reproduce such a graph but they are not programmer and probably don't want to be! They want to spend most of the time on thinking! and less time on programing. So they come to this website and see that someone tried to reproduce that graph here. Now, they don't need to spend time to figure out how to get it. I know they could search for the question asked on this site in the first place. However, I think by mentioning these articles it is easier to get the result. Perhaps instead of a list of articles a tag for different research fields and a tag for DOI of each article are enough. So instead of asking the question someone can go to the photosynthesis tag and find the answer there or simply search the DOI of the article to see if anybody has asked a similar question about that article.

  • While really interesting, I fear that the question might be too broad. It is somewhat related to mathematica.stackexchange.com/q/18/131. Let´s see what other users think.
    – Yves Klett
    Commented Nov 12, 2014 at 11:38
  • For published books see wolfram.com/books/topics.html Commented Nov 12, 2014 at 11:52
  • 2
    one problem you have is that most authors dont reference software used for basic functionality such as plotting.
    – george2079
    Commented Nov 12, 2014 at 12:21
  • 4
    Actually Wolfram used to collect published papers that used Mathematica and kept them in a continuously updated list. We actually received a T-Shirt for each paper we sent them. Must have been in place in the mid- to late-1990s. Commented Nov 12, 2014 at 12:32
  • 2
    A publishing tag or similar could be useful. After your edit the question belongs more on meta than main, though.
    – Yves Klett
    Commented Nov 12, 2014 at 13:24
  • @YvesKlett How can I send it to the meta? It seems because of not being asked in meta people want to close the question.
    – MOON
    Commented Nov 12, 2014 at 16:04
  • 1
    yashar, not to worry. The close voters are most likely for moving the question to meta, so it will get moved there shortly. So no closure, just migration with no negative implications whatsoever.
    – Yves Klett
    Commented Nov 12, 2014 at 16:58
  • FYI web of science reports 3089 hits on "mathematica" I kind of expected more, though as I said most folks who use it as a basic tool aren't going to name the software in a publication
    – george2079
    Commented Nov 12, 2014 at 18:35
  • So far I have never mentioned Mathematica or the specifics of how something was done with Mathematica. For plots, I don't think this is worth mentioning ... For algorithms and methods, it's the method itself that should be described not its implementation using specific software.
    – Szabolcs
    Commented Nov 12, 2014 at 19:44
  • @Szabolcs I mean that if somebody asks a question about MMA which is related to some article, this can be mentioned and tagged.
    – MOON
    Commented Nov 12, 2014 at 20:25
  • 3
    I'm not sure exactly how this might be useful... IMO, it's no more helpful than knowing which pen/laptop/typewriter an author used to write a book, just in case you might ever want to write a similar book.
    – rm -rf Mod
    Commented Nov 13, 2014 at 1:02
  • 4
    FWIW I mention using Mathematica in my publications so that I can justify to university administration the value of a fairly expensive site license. Commented Nov 15, 2014 at 17:26
  • I mentioned using Mathematica in my publications when I used its built-in machine learning features or generating realizations of fractional Brownian/Gaussian motion/noise etc. Indeed, when only for plotting points/lines I didn't as it is irrelevant. Although I found somehow amusing the seaborn stripplot.
    – corey979
    Commented Jan 3, 2017 at 11:12


You must log in to answer this question.

Browse other questions tagged .