| name | ors-tables-figures |
| description | Use when building the exhibits for an Operations Research (OR) manuscript — theorem/assumption layout, comparison tables against prior work, computational-results tables, and convergence/scaling plots in INFORMS house style. Lays out exhibits; it does not generate the numbers (ors-data-analysis) or prove the results (ors-methods). |
Tables, Figures & Exhibits (ors-tables-figures)
When to trigger
- The model, proofs, and computational results exist and must be displayed clearly.
- You need a clean comparison table separating your method from prior work.
- Reviewers should be able to read a result table without hunting through the text.
Exhibits that carry an OR paper
Unlike empirical social-science papers built around correlation and regression tables,
Operations Research exhibits are about structure, guarantees, and computation:
- Formal-statement layout: number theorems, propositions, lemmas, and assumptions
consistently (Theorem 1, Assumption 1) and reference them by number everywhere.
Use the INFORMS LaTeX style files /
amsthm so environments render uniformly.
- Comparison table (prior work × properties): rows = methods/papers, columns =
{assumptions, strongest result, approximation factor, complexity/rate}. This is the
single most persuasive OR exhibit for novelty.
- Computational-results table: instances/sizes × {optimality gap, time,
iterations, baseline comparison}. Report units, time limits, and which configuration
produced the row; bold or mark wins honestly.
- Plots: convergence curves, scaling (size vs. time, ideally log-log), performance
profiles across instance sets, and for stochastic output error bars / confidence
intervals — never bare means.
INFORMS house-style notes
- Format: prepare for 1.5-spaced, 11-point, 1-inch-margin manuscript layout;
submit as PDF (source LaTeX/Word on acceptance). Use the provided LaTeX style files.
- Self-contained exhibits: each table/figure has a complete caption (what, units,
instance set, what "best" means) so it stands alone.
- Notation consistency: symbols in exhibits match the text exactly; define them in
the caption or a notation table.
- E-companion: large result tables and ablations can go to the e-companion (which
must not be longer than the manuscript); keep the headline exhibits in the main text.
Vector tooling
Use TikZ/PGFPlots (or matplotlib exported to vector) for crisp figures; performance
profiles and log-log scaling plots reproduce well as vectors. Keep raw data/scripts in
the ORJournal repository so every exhibit regenerates.
Exhibit pushback patterns and the INFORMS-style fix
| Referee remark on an exhibit | What it flags | Venue-specific fix |
|---|
| "Computational study lacks benchmarks" | no recognized baseline column | add a column for the closest prior method and a strong solver on standard instances |
| "Cannot tell what 'best' means" | undefined win marking | caption defines the metric and tie-breaking; bold/mark honestly |
| "Results not reproducible from the table" | missing units/time-limit/hardware | state units, time limit, termination, hardware, and the producing configuration |
| "Means hide variability" | bare means for stochastic output | error bars / confidence intervals on every random-output figure |
| "Theorem numbers don't match the text" | label drift | single numbering scheme via amsthm; reference by number everywhere |
| "Scaling claim unsupported" | linear-axis time plot | log-log size-vs-time plot or a performance profile across the instance set |
These are the exhibit-level versions of the two flags that sink OR computational
sections: no benchmarks and structure-not-connected-to-application. Because
Operations Research is the INFORMS flagship demanding both theorem-grade rigor and a
credible computational study, the comparison table and the performance profile carry as
much referee weight as the theorem environments.
Worked exhibit pair (illustrative numbers)
A paper proves a 1.5-approximation and validates it. Two exhibits do the persuading:
Comparison table — Method × {assumption, factor, complexity}:
| Method | Assumption | Factor | Complexity |
|---|
| Prior (Author year) | bounded ratios | 2.0 | O(n²) |
| This paper | general weights | 1.5 | O(n² log n) |
Computational table — Instance set × {mean gap %, time (s), solver baseline}, e.g.
TSPLIB-derived instances showing 1.8% mean gap vs. 31% for the heuristic baseline at a
600 s limit on stated hardware, with the proved 50% bound never violated. The figure
pairs them: a log-log scaling plot with confidence-interval bands over 30 seeds. The
table corroborates the theorem's bound; the plot shows it holds as size grows.
Execution bridge (StatsPAI / Stata MCP)
Generate exhibits from the fitted result, not by retyping numbers (the usual source of
body-vs-appendix drift). Full map: execution-with-mcp. Operations Research is predominantly analytical / optimization / stochastic modeling; use the chain below only for its empirical/causal papers — modeling, optimization, and simulation are outside this causal-inference toolchain.
- Tables:
etable (multi-model columns) or did_summary_to_latex straight from the
result_id.
- Figures:
plot_from_result / enhanced_event_study_plot / event_study_table —
axis units and the SE/clustering note baked in.
- Every note names the estimator + clustering and states the effect size in
interpretable units.
See a full fitted-result → exhibit chain in the JF execution walkthrough.
Anti-patterns
- A results table with no time limits, units, or hardware — irreproducible.
- Bare means for stochastic output with no confidence intervals.
- A comparison table that omits the closest competitor.
- Theorem/assumption numbers that drift between text and exhibits.
- Raster screenshots of plots instead of vector figures.
Output format
【Formal statements】numbered consistently; INFORMS/amsthm style
【Comparison table】prior work × {assumptions, result, complexity}: drafted?
【Computational table】instances × {gap, time, baseline}; units/limits stated
【Plots】convergence / scaling / CIs present?
【House style】1.5-spaced, 11-pt; self-contained captions; e-companion split
【Next step】ors-writing-style
