관련 연구 절 쓰기
관련 연구는 논문을 나열하는 게 아니라 잇는 글입니다. 어떻게 이어지는지부터 시작하세요.
A related work section fails in a predictable way: it becomes a list. Each prior paper gets a sentence, the sentences are joined by "however", and nothing in the section tells a reader why those papers belong together or what they collectively leave open. Reviewers skim lists, and a skimmed related work section is a wasted opportunity to establish that your contribution is necessary. The version that works groups papers by the assumption they share and says what that assumption costs — which requires knowing not only what each paper found but how they relate to each other.
How long should a related work section be?
Long enough to establish why your contribution is needed, which is usually shorter than a complete survey of the area.
Should I cite everything in the area?
No. Cite what your contribution depends on or displaces. Exhaustive citation without grouping reads as a list regardless of length.
What makes related work read as original?
Grouping by shared assumption rather than by paper, and naming what the group leaves open. That judgement is yours and cannot be summarised from the sources.