<Li> Modelling graphs: There is no rigorous right or wrong with mind maps, relying on the arbitrariness of mnemonic systems . A UML diagram or a semantic network has structured elements modelling relationships, with lines connecting objects to indicate relationship . This is generally done in black and white with a clear and agreed iconography . Mind maps serve a different purpose: they help with memory and organization . Mind maps are collections of words structured by the mental context of the author with visual mnemonics, and, through the use of colour, icons and visual links, are informal and necessary to the proper functioning of the mind map . </Li> <P> Cunningham (2005) conducted a user study in which 80% of the students thought "mindmapping helped them understand concepts and ideas in science". Other studies also report some subjective positive effects on the use of mind maps . Positive opinions on their effectiveness, however, were much more prominent among students of art and design than in students of computer and information technology, with 62.5% vs 34% (respectively) agreeing that they were able to understand concepts better with mind mapping software . Farrand, Hussain, and Hennessy (2002) found that spider diagrams (similar to concept maps) had limited, but significant, impact on memory recall in undergraduate students (a 10% increase over baseline for a 600 - word text only) as compared to preferred study methods (a 6% increase over baseline). This improvement was only robust after a week for those in the diagram group and there was a significant decrease in motivation compared to the subjects' preferred methods of note taking . A meta study about concept mapping concluded that concept mapping is more effective than "reading text passages, attending lectures, and participating in class discussions". The same study also concluded that concept mapping is slightly more effective "than other constructive activities such as writing summaries and outlines". However, results were inconsistent, with the authors noting "significant heterogeneity was found in most subsets". In addition, they concluded that low - ability students may benefit more from mind mapping than high - ability students . </P> <P> Beel & Langer (2011) conducted a comprehensive analysis of the content of mind maps . They analysed 19,379 mind maps from 11,179 users of the mind mapping applications SciPlore MindMapping (now Docear) and MindMeister . Results include that average users create only a few mind maps (mean = 2.7), average mind maps are rather small (31 nodes) with each node containing about 3 words (median). However, there were exceptions . One user created more than 200 mind maps, the largest mind map consisted of more than 50,000 nodes and the largest node contained ~ 7500 words . The study also showed that between different mind mapping applications (Docear vs MindMeister) significant differences exist related to how users create mind maps . </P> <P> There have been some attempts to create mind maps automatically . Brucks & Schommer created mind maps automatically from full - text streams . Rothenberger et al. extracted the main story of a text and presented it as mind map . And there is a patent about automatically creating sub-topics in mind maps . </P>

Where is the sheet # found on a map