Both papers are the result of long term research efforts by multiple authors, and are supplemented by a multitude of software environments: all of the software engineering tools under study are available via virtual machines (VMs) in the academic SHARE cloud.
And, after all of the massaging through the laborious multiple-tool process, authors are often left with a product that looks fairly boring and generic.
If you have multiple authors who are affiliated to the same institution, place the name of the institution after you list the names of the writers.
If you have multiple authors who are affiliated with different institutions, separate the names of the authors and write the name of each writer's corresponding university below his or her name.[2].
This is due to multiple factors and the authors are working with partners such as the National Molecular Diagnostics User Group in Canada to address these gaps.
The authors are of multiple opinions regarding the trajectory of formation boundaries and fault contacts.
Only PIs were screened for industry associations, thereby minimizing the possibility that studies with multiple authors would be more likely to have an author with an industry association (vs. single authored studies).
Most systematic reviews will include multiple outcome comparisons, and if review authors are free to choose and highlight single results among the many comparisons, there will be an increased risk of false declaration on the effectiveness of an assessed intervention.
By using this measurement, the authors are able to find multiple droughts throughout the Mediterranean region.
