If you feel you must explain recent achievements in much detail — say, in more than one or two paragraphs — consider moving the details to a section titled State of the art (or something similar) after the Introduction, but do provide a brief idea of the actual situation in the Introduction. Emphasize the contrast between the actual and desired situations with such words as but, however, or unfortunately.The traditional Results and Discussion sections are best combined because results make little sense to most readers without interpretation.When reporting and discussing your results, do not force your readers to go through everything you went through in chronological order.Write four components, probably (but not necessarily) in four paragraphs: context, need, task, and object of the document.At the beginning of the Introduction section, the context and need work together as a funnel: They start broad and progressively narrow down to the issue addressed in the paper.Here are three examples of such a combination: An Introduction is usually clearer and more logical when it separates what the authors have done (the task) from what the paper itself attempts or covers (the object of the document).In other words, the task clarifies your contribution as a scientist, whereas the object of the document prepares readers for the structure of the paper, thus allowing focused or selective reading. " Although papers can be organized into sections in many ways, those reporting experimental work typically include Materials and Methods, Results, and Discussion in their body.You may also want to anchor your context in space (either geographically or within a given research field).Convey the need for the work as an opposition between actual and desired situations.(Papers reporting something other than experiments, such as a new method or technology, typically have different sections in their body, but they include the same Introduction and Conclusion sections as described above.) Although the above structure reflects the progression of most research projects, effective papers typically break the chronology in at least three ways to present their content in the order in which the audience will most likely want to read it.First and foremost, they summarize the motivation for, and the outcome of, the work in an abstract, located before the Introduction.