%% This is file `template-cdrarticle.tex', Version 2.1
%%
%% The first command in your LaTeX source must be the \documentclass command.
%%
%% V 2.1 - Updated copyright statement for CC Licenses
% ================= DOCUMENT CLASS (pick/uncomment ONE) =================
% Review (double-blind, for Research Articles; hides authors/acknowledgments):
%\documentclass[cdrreview,anonymous,review]{cdrart}
% Review (single-blind, for Professional Commentaries)
%\documentclass[cdrreview,review]{cdrart}
% Inpress (close to final draft):
%\documentclass[cdrprint,authordraft,inpress]{cdrart}
% Final/print (after acceptance):
\documentclass[cdrprint]{cdrart}
% ================= SUBMISSION TYPE (pick/uncomment ONE) =================
\cdrArticleType{Research Article}
%\cdrArticleType{Professional Commentary}
%\cdrArticleType{Senior Leader Perspective} %by invitation only
%\cdrArticleType{Editorial}
% ================= DO NOT EDIT =================
\input{config}
% ================= BIBLIOGRAPHY =================
%% For managing citations, it is recommended to use bibliography
%% files in BibLaTeX format. You must use the Chicago Manual of Style (CMS) Author-Date standard. The Chicago folder has the necessary files to use the CMS for this template.
%%
%% Look at the template-bibliography.bib file for template showcasing the biblatex style.
\usepackage[authordate,citetracker=true,dashed=false,backend=biber]{biblatex-chicago}
\setlength{\bibitemsep}{0pt}
\AtBeginBibliography{\setstretch{1}\lseries\fontsize{7.8}{9}\selectfont}
\addbibresource{template-bibliography.bib} % Change name within the brackets to that of your bibliography
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
%% End of preamble, start of the body of the document source.
\begin{document}
% ================= ARTICLE TITLE =================
\title{Insert The Title of Your Paper Here}
% Ideally fitting on two lines, 3 maximum.
%\title[Short Title]{Insert The Title of Your Paper Here}
% ====== AUTHORS & AFFILIATIONS ======
%% These commands are used to define the authors and their affiliations.
\author{First A. Author}
\authornote{Corresponding author: first.author@example.org}
%\authornote{Both authors contributed equally to this research.}
\affiliationnum[1]
\affiliationnum[2]
\email{first.author@example.org}
%\orcid{0000-0000-0000-0000}
\author{Second B. Author}
%\authornotemark[2]
\affiliationnum[1]
\affiliationnum[3]
\email{second.author@example.org}
\author{Third C. Author}
\affiliationnum[1]
\email{third.author@example.org}
\affiliation{%
\num{1}
\institution{Army Cyber Institute}
\city{West Point}
\state{NY}
\country{USA}
}
\affiliation{%
\num{2}
\institution{Institution Two}
\city{City}
\state{State}
\country{Country}
}
\affiliation{%
\num{3}
\institution{Institution Three}
\city{City}
\country{Country}
}
%% By default, the full list of authors will be used in the page headers in the format Initial Last Name.
\renewcommand{\shortauthors}{Initial Last Name}
% ================= ABSTRACT AND KEYWORDS =================
% Abstract: 150-200 words, no citations, no figures/tables/equations.
\begin{abstract}
Sample text inserted for demonstration. Insert your abstract here, with no distinctive header. The abstract should be approximately 200 words. It should not contain bibliographical references. Your abstract must give readers a brief summary of your article. It should be informative and accessible: indicate the general scope of the article, the main research objectives or argumentation line, methods used (in the case of a research paper), the main results obtained and conclusions drawn. The abstract must be complete in itself: it must not contain undefined abbreviations and must not refer to any table, figure, reference or equation numbers.
The review process for research articles is double-blind: the submitted document should not include author information and should not include acknowledgments, or mentions (e.g., in citations or discussion of related work) that would make the authorship apparent. Upon acceptance, the author and affiliation information will be added to your paper.
\end{abstract}
%%
% Insert 5-7 keywords, comma-separated
\keywords{Insert 5-7 comma-delimited keywords, keyword 2, keyword 3, keyword 4}
%%
%% This command processes the author, affiliation, and title information and builds the first part of the formatted document.
\maketitle\newpage
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
% ================= BODY OF THE MANUSCRIPT =================
\section*{About this template}
The Cyber Defense Review manuscript template enables authors to type their content into the pre-existing set of formatting styles applied to the sample placeholder text. Throughout the document, you will find further formatting instructions and a summary of the information contained in the Instructions to Authors on the CDR website (\url{https://cyberdefensereview.army.mil/}). Some sections also include guidance on academic writing; these are for inspiration purposes and are not prescriptive.
\subsection*{Manuscript Submission}
Manuscripts must be submitted in Microsoft Word (.docx) or LaTeX (with source files and compiled PDF) formats through the journal’s submission system (\url{http://www.editorialmanager.com/cyberdefreview}).
Submissions should be in English and written in a clear, concise, and scholarly tone. Use American English spelling and conventions throughout. Avoid jargon and define acronyms upon first use.
\subsection*{Selecting your Submission Type}
\subsubsection*{Research Articles} are peer-reviewed contributions presenting original, rigorous and theoretically grounded scholarship relevant to the cyber defense landscape. Given the multidisciplinary nature of the journal and its broad readership, including practitioners, academics, policymakers, and military professionals, we welcome a wide range of methodologically sound research approaches and submissions, from shorter analytical pieces to longer, in-depth studies. Typical length ranges from 3,000 to 12,000 words (excluding abstract and references), with shorter pieces expected to have a tightly scoped contribution and longer ones offering more substantial or integrative insights. Authors should ensure that their articles can be read at both interdisciplinary and disciplinary levels.
\textbf{Every research article must clearly articulate its research question(s), contribution statement, describe the research design or methodology employed, and demonstrate engagement with existing academic literature.} Submissions should contribute to knowledge development through systematic analysis, empirical evidence, or theoretical advancement, rather than personal reflection or commentary.
\subsubsection*{Professional Commentaries} provide timely, practice-oriented reflections on current developments, operational challenges, or policy issues in the cyber defense landscape. These contributions are designed to stimulate informed discussion and share wisdom and knowledge across sectors.
They do not require a formal research design or empirical data, but the strongest commentaries engage thoughtfully with relevant literature, frameworks, or debates to support and enrich the author’s argument or perspective.
They are typically 2,500 to 6,000 words (excluding abstract and references).
The increasing availability of AI-assisted writing tools has made it easier to produce summaries and general discussions of cybersecurity topics. As a result, the CDR applies careful editorial scrutiny to Commentaries to ensure they provide meaningful value beyond what can be readily generated from existing sources. \textbf{Successful commentaries are expected to demonstrate clear originality, offer substantive analysis or recommendations, and be firmly grounded in the author's expertise and, where appropriate, operational or policy experience}. Submissions that primarily summarize existing literature, synthesize publicly available information, or present generic observations without distinctive insights are unlikely to be considered for publication.
Submissions to this track follow a single-blind review process (the reviewers know the identity of the authors).
\subsection*{Responsible Use of Large Language Models and Generative AI Tools}
We allow authors to use Large Language Models (LLMs) and genAI tools to assist with writing, editing, or translation. Authors may use AI tools to enhance grammar, clarity, or spelling, without needing disclosure.
Any use beyond language polishing must be done under three conditions and be transparently reported. First, all content produced must be correct, original, and accurately reflect the author’s own intellectual contributions. Authors remain fully responsible for AI outputs as well as the appropriateness of the research process for which AI is used. Second, authors must disclose uses of AI software when it generates substantive new text, code, tables, or figures. Such disclosures, detailing the tool used and sections affected, should be included in acknowledgments with the level of detail matching the extent of AI use. Third, AI tools must not be listed as co-authors; all listed authors must meet standard authorship criteria and are fully accountable for the content.
As part of our initial editorial screening, each submission is assessed using a research integrity tool. The results of automated screening do not independently determine an editorial decision but may prompt further investigation. While the responsible use of AI is permitted under our editorial policy, \textbf{submissions showing insufficient human oversight, serious breaches of scholarly standards, or indications of research misconduct may be desk rejected.} Such concerns include, but are not limited to, fabricated or hallucinated references; inaccurate, unverifiable, or unsupported statements; plagiarism or substantial undisclosed text recycling; fabricated, falsified, or manipulated data, results, figures, or images; duplicate or simultaneous submission; misrepresentation of methods, sources, findings, or authorship; unauthorized use of copyrighted material; and failure to disclose AI use where such disclosure is required.
\subsection*{Copyright and Use of Third-Party Material}
The author is responsible for securing permission for any copyrighted material included in the submission. The author must ensure the content of the submission does not contain material that is libelous or would violate copyright or otherwise infringe upon the rights of others, including patent, trademark, trade secret, or rights of privacy or publicity. Prior to publication of the article, the author shall provide the CDR with proof of consent to use all copyright-protected material.
%If your paper contains material for which you do not have Open Access re-use permissions, please state this clearly by supplying the following credit line alongside the material: \textit{Title of content, Author, Original publication, year of original publication, by permission of [rights holder]. This image/content is not covered by the terms of the Creative Commons licence of this publication. For permission to reuse, please contact the rights holder}.
\newpage
\section*{THIS IS AN EXAMPLE FOR FIRST LEVEL HEAD – SECTION HEAD}
\subsection*{This is an Example for Second Level Head – Subsection Head}
\subsubsection*{This is an Example for Third Level Head – Subsubsection Head}
Organize your article using section headings and subheadings (this template supports three levels: section, subsection, and subsubsection).
\subsection*{Citing Related Work}
The CDR uses a Chicago Manual of Style Author-Date citation style:\\ \url{www.chicagomanualofstyle.org/tools_citationguide/citation-guide-2.html}\\
\subsubsection*{In-text citations} Sources are cited in the text, usually in parentheses, by the author’s last name and publication year. Author-date citations are usually placed just before a mark of punctuation.
\begin{table}[h!]
\centering
\tiny
\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.2}
\begin{tabular}{@{}p{0.35\textwidth}p{0.25\textwidth}p{0.35\textwidth}@{}}
\toprule
\textbf{Command} & \textbf{Output example} & \textbf{Description} \\
\midrule
\verb|\autocite{HarknettSmeets2020}| & (Harknett and Smeets 2020) & Parenthetical citation, typically at the end of a sentence. \\
\verb|\textcite{HarknettSmeets2020}| & Harknett and Smeets (2020) & In-text citation that integrates the author’s name into the sentence. \\
\verb|\gentextcite{Sanger2018}| & Sanger’s (2018) & Genitive (possessive) in-text citation. \\
\verb|\autocite[15]{Sanger2018}| & (Sanger 2018, 15-16) & Adds a page number or range to the citation. \\
\verb|\autocite[comment]{Dawson2023}| & (Dawson 2023, comment) & Adds a short comment. Can be combined with page number. \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\caption{Quick reference for common Chicago-style citation commands in the CDR template.}
\label{tab:citationcommands}
\CDRtabbookmark[3]{Quick reference for citations}{tab:citationcommands}
\end{table}
Where the author’s name appears in the text, it need not be repeated in the parenthetical citation. For example: \gentextcite{Sanger2018} book on the cyber age warns against…’’
%When the same page or pages in the same source are cited more than once in one paragraph, the parenthetical citation can be placed after the last reference or at the end of the paragraph.
When a reference list includes two or more works published in the same year by the same author(s), the text citations and reference list use letters (e.g., \autocite{GAO2020Cl, GAO2020Ut}). For works by two or three authors, all names are included \autocite{SanchezChamorro2024}. For more than three authors, only the name of the first author is used, followed by ‘et al.’ \parencite{Distler2021}. This will be done automatically if you use the citations command.
%Direct quotes from a source include the page numbers.
The References section at the end of this document shows how sources in the reference list should appear. Ensure that your bibtex entries are accurate, particularly for government documents (e.g., \autocite{DoD2018_CyberStrategy}).
\subsubsection*{Footnotes}
Footnotes may be used only for explanatory comments, not for bibliographic references. Footnotes can be added using the command \verb|\footnote|. Here is a footnote\footnote{Here is a footnote}
\subsubsection*{Verbatim Quotes}
You can include verbatim quotes within your text by enclosing them in quotation marks. For quotes longer than three lines, format them as a block quote, for example:
\begin{quote}
\lipsum[1][1-3]
\end{quote}
You can also use italics when introducing a new key term (e.g., cyber health security theory), and bold for emphasis if needed. Example: “We define \textit{cyber health security theory} as…”
\subsection*{Figures and Tables}
Figures and tables should be clearly labeled and embedded within the text near their first mention. Ensure all visuals are high-resolution (minimum 300 dpi) and suitable for grayscale printing. Please follow accessibility best practices:
\begin{itemize}
\item Provide alt text for all figures and tables to describe their content for screen readers.
\item Use symbols, patterns, or labels in graphs and charts instead of color alone, as all papers are printed in grayscale. Color should not be used to convey meaning.
\item Use clear, legible fonts and ensure high contrast between text and background.
\end{itemize}
\subsubsection*{Figures}
The ``\verb|figure|'' environment should be used. One or more images can be placed within a figure. If a figure contains third-party material, you must clearly identify it as such, as shown in Figure~\ref{fig:colossus}. Figures should include a caption (below the figure) and a description (unless decorative). These are used by assistive technologies, search engine crawlers or when images cannot be loaded.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=.35\linewidth]{example-figure}
\caption{A Colossus Mark 2 codebreaking computer operated by D. Du Boisson (left) and E. Booker (right), 1943. Unknown author, via Wikimedia Commons. (\url{https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Colossus.jpg}).}
\Description{Two women operate an early computer in a black-and-white photograph. The large machine is filled with rows of cables, switches, and vacuum tubes. One woman stands at a control panel with dials and switches, while the other manages tape reels on the right side of the machine. The room appears to be part of a laboratory or computing facility from the mid-20th century.}
\label{fig:colossus}
\CDRfigbookmark[3]{A Colossus Mark 2}{fig:colossus}
\end{figure}
\subsubsection*{Tables}
The ``\verb|cdrart|'' document class includes the ``\verb|booktabs|''
package for tables. The contents of the table must go in the \textbf{tabularx} environment.
Use midrule to separate table header rows from data rows, and use it only for this purpose. This enables assistive technologies to recognize headers. Here is the point at which Table~\ref{tab:freq} is included in the file.
\begin{table}[ht]
\tiny
\begin{tabular}{ccl}
\toprule
Non-English or Math&Frequency&Comments\\
\midrule
\O & 1 in 1,000& For Swedish names\\
$\pi$ & 1 in 5& Common in math\\
\$ & 4 in 5 & Used in business\\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\caption{Frequency of Special Characters}
\label{tab:freq}
\CDRtabbookmark[3]{Frequency of Special Characters}{tab:freq}
\end{table}
\newpage
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
%%% THE FOLLOWING INSTRUCTIONS ARE FOR RESEARCH ARTICLES
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\section*{RESEARCH ARTICLE RECOMMENDATIONS}
% See recommendations for Professional Commentaries below
\section{INTRODUCTION}
The introduction should briefly place the study in context and highlight why it is important. Define the purpose of the work and its significance. Suggested guiding questions:
\begin{itemize}
\item What is the problem or opportunity? Who is impacted, and in what context? Why do we need to address it?
\item Why does it matter now? How significant is the issue (use evidence such as reports, survey data, or prior research)?
\item What did you do to address it (summarize in 3 sentences)?
\item What is your contribution, and who benefits from it?
\item What are the key concepts of your paper, and how do you define them (Definitions can also be provided in the Related Work section if more appropriate.)
\end{itemize}
Organize from general to specific. Do not include results or discussion here. Add references to literature or data that scope the problem and make the case for timeliness.
\section{BACKGROUND}
Provide additional historical, technical, or conceptual background if needed. This section is optional and may be merged into the introduction if concise.
\section{RELATED WORK}
Discuss prior work and situate your study in the body of academic and professional literature. Do not simply list sources; synthesize and analyze. Address:
\begin{itemize}
\item How have others tried to solve this problem?
\item What are the strengths and shortcomings of prior approaches?
\item What opportunities remain for your work to address?
\end{itemize}
Clearly define key concepts that are used throughout the paper (if not already done in the introduction). We recommend dividing this section into subsections with meaningful titles.
\section{RESEARCH DESIGN}
Describe the methodology clearly and in enough detail for others to evaluate or replicate. Depending on your discipline and study type, include:
\begin{itemize}
\item Research objectives (sometimes includes precise research questions or hypotheses)
\item Study design (e.g., case study, experiment, literature review, survey, simulations, mixed-methods approaches)
\item Participants / data sources / materials
\item Procedures or protocols
\item Analytical framework (qualitative, quantitative, mixed methods)
\end{itemize}
\section{FINDINGS}
Present your results in a clear, logical, and concise manner. Use tables, figures, or visuals where appropriate. Ensure all figures and tables are properly labeled and referenced in text. Do not interpret results extensively here—that belongs in the discussion.
\section{DISCUSSION}
Interpret your findings in relation to prior studies, theory, and practice. Discuss:
\begin{itemize}
\item What do the results mean?
\item How do they compare with existing research?
\item What are the implications and open questions?
\item What are the limitations of your study? (briefly)
\item What future work does this suggest?
\end{itemize}
\section{IMPLICATIONS FOR CYBER DEFENSE}
As part of the discussion, or as a separate subsection, explain specifically how your work informs the field of cyber defense. What are the operational, strategic, policy, or technological implications? How can military, industry, or government stakeholders apply your insights?
\section{CONCLUSION}
Summarize the main contributions of your work, highlight the significance of the findings, and restate their relevance to cyber defense. Keep concise. Avoid introducing new results
\section{USE OF SOURCES AND EVIDENCE}
Research articles must be grounded in a rigorous, well-balanced, and traceable use of sources. Submissions are expected to demonstrate substantive engagement with the state of the art through:
\begin{itemize}
\item Peer-reviewed academic literature (to establish theoretical and methodological grounding),
\item Technical reports and institutional publications (e.g., industry, think tanks, international organizations),
\item Government and military documents (e.g., doctrine, strategy papers, official statements).
\end{itemize}
Journalistic sources (e.g., newspaper articles, media reports) may be used to illustrate recent developments or provide contextual examples; however, they should not constitute the primary evidentiary basis of the argument. Claims central to the contribution must be supported by authoritative, verifiable, and enduring sources.
\newpage
% END OF RESEARCH ARTICLES INSTRUCTIONS
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
%%% THE FOLLOWING INSTRUCTIONS ARE FOR PROFESSIONAL COMMENTARIES %%%
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\section*{PROFESSIONAL COMMENTARY RECOMMENDATIONS}
% See recommandations for a Research Article above
A strong Professional Commentary should be organized around a clear central claim rather than a broad survey of a topic. Authors should identify the principal argument, lesson, warning, or recommendation they want readers to retain and make that position explicit early in the manuscript.
Start by asking yourself: What is the central claim of the commentary? What assumption, practice, or prevailing interpretation does it reinforce or challenge? What problem or opportunity is currently underestimated? What should the cyber defense community do differently as a result?
Consider the intended stance of your commentary. For example, the contribution may be:
\begin{itemize}
\item Reflective: drawing lessons from experience or implementation;
\item Corrective: challenging a prevailing assumption, narrative, or professional practice;
\item Warning-oriented: identifying an underestimated risk, vulnerability, or unintended consequence;
\item Opportunity-oriented: highlighting an emerging capability, organizational shift, or overlooked advantage;
\item Prescriptive: recommending a specific change in policy, doctrine, operations, technology, or professional practice.
\end{itemize}
\section*{INTRODUCTION}
The introduction should briefly place your commentary in context and explain why it matters. Since professional commentaries are practice-oriented, the introduction should balance relevance for practitioners and accessibility for a broad readership.
Suggested guiding questions:
\begin{itemize}
\item What is the challenge, opportunity or strategic issue you are addressing? Who is impacted, and in what mission or context?
\item Why does it matter now? Emphasize timeliness by connecting to – and drawing on evidence from – recent conflicts, events, adversary actions, technological advances, doctrinal changes, or current defense priorities (e.g., resilience, deterrence, force generation).
\item What is your perspective or experience? Briefly summarize the lens of your experience—military command, operational planning, acquisition, cyber operations, policy-making, etc.— and how this grounds your insights.
\item What is the unique value of your commentary? Are you offering lessons from the field, operational reflections, or policy insights that can inform strategy, doctrine, or capability development? Clarify whether you are offering insights from practice, reflections from experience, or provocative arguments to spark discussion? Emphasize the relevance for key defense stakeholders: who might benefit from reading this piece (e.g., military forces, defense industry, policymakers)?
\end{itemize}
\section*{MAIN BODY}
The body can be structured flexibly, but it should follow a logical flow. Use clear headings to help readers navigate the commentary. Possible elements include:
\begin{itemize}
\item \textbf{Context and background}: Provide additional historical, geopolitical, technical, or conceptual background if necessary. Clearly define key concepts that are used throughout the paper.
\item \textbf{Author’s Perspective}: Bring in your own practice-based insights, experiences, or lessons learned. This is a hallmark of this format. The experience, perspective, or professional role of the author(s) is central to the value of the piece.
Explain what makes your vantage point distinctive. What responsibilities, decisions, professional roles, or first-hand observations allow you to see aspects of the issue that may not be apparent to others? Where does your experience provide insight into tradeoffs, constraints, implementation challenges, or risks that are frequently underestimated? The strongest Professional Commentaries offer an argument or insight that could not have been written in the same way by someone without the author’s particular experience or expertise.
\item \textbf{Analysis and reflection}: Engage with relevant literature, frameworks, or prior discussions to support and enrich your points. Avoid simply descriptive writing—show implications, contrasts, or lessons.
\end{itemize}
\section*{DISCUSSION / IMPLICATIONS FOR CYBER DEFENSE}
\begin{itemize}
\item Draw out the practical insights: What are the operational, strategic, policy, or technological implications? What should military, industry, or government stakeholders take away from this commentary?
\item Highlight challenges, risks, or opportunities that deserve further attention.
\item Situate your reflections in the broader cyber defense landscape: what is new, provocative, or valuable?
\end{itemize}
\section*{CONCLUSION}
Summarize your key message and its relevance to cyber defense in a strong closing statement. Optionally, end with recommendations or questions for future discussion.
\section*{USE OF SOURCES AND EVIDENCE}
Professional Commentaries are expected to be grounded in informed judgment, experience, and credible sources, while maintaining a clear narrative. Authors are encouraged to draw on:
\begin{itemize}
\item Relevant academic literature (where appropriate),
\item Government, military, or institutional documents,
\item Technical reports, policy papers, or practitioner-oriented publications,
\item First-hand experience, observations, or professional practice.
\end{itemize}
Unlike research articles, Professional Commentaries do not require exhaustive literature reviews. However, arguments should still be supported by evidence where possible and should demonstrate awareness of ongoing discussions in the field.
Journalistic sources (e.g., newspaper articles) may be used to illustrate current events or trends, but should be complemented by more authoritative or analytical sources when supporting core claims.
Credibility in Commentaries is strengthened by grounding insights in concrete examples, operational experience, or observable patterns, rather than remaining at a purely abstract or opinion-based level.
% END OF PROFESSIONAL COMMENTARY INSTRUCTIONS
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\newpage
% ================= ABOUT THE AUTHOR(S) =================
%% ABOUT THE AUTHOR(S) %
%% The "About the author(s) section is defined using the "biography" environment(and NOT an unnumbered section). This section is hidden when the document class contains review or anonymous for research articles.
\begin{biography}
\textbf{Author 1 Rank/Title First Name Last Name} insert your short bio here (150 words max.).
\textbf{Author 2 Rank/Title First Name Last Name} insert your short bio here (150 words max.).
\textbf{Author 3 First Name Last Name} insert your short bio here (150 words max.).
\end{biography}
% ================= ACKNOWLEDGMENTS =================
%% The acknowledgments section is defined using the "acks" environment(and NOT an unnumbered section). This ensures the proper identification of the section in the article metadata, and the consistent spelling of the heading.
\begin{acks}
Acknowledgments are hidden when the document class is set to \textit{review}. They will be added to manuscripts accepted for publication. Acknowledgments are not compulsory. Where included, they should be brief. Grant or contribution numbers may be acknowledged.
\end{acks}
% ================= BIBLIOGRAPHY =================
%%
%% The next line prints the bibliography.
\printbibliography[title=REFERENCES]
% ================= APPENDICES =================
%%
%% If your work has an appendix, this is the place to add it.
\newpage
\appendix
\section{Appendix A: Examples Reference List Entries}
\textbf{Book}
\noindent Sanger, David. 2018. The Perfect Weapon: War, Sabotage, and Fear in the Cyber Age. Crown Publishers.
\textbf{Book Chapter}
\noindent Sandvik, Kristin B. 2016. “Law in the Militarization of Cyberspace: Framing a Critical Research Agenda.” In Conflict in Cyber Space: Theoretical, Strategic and Legal Perspectives, edited by I. K.Friis and J. Ringsmose, 175–197. Routledge
\textbf{Journal article}
\noindent Harknett, Richard J., and Max Smeets. 2020. “Cyber Campaigns and Strategic Outcomes.” Journal of Strategic Studies 45 (4): 534-567. https://doi.org/10.1080/01402390.2020.1732354
\textbf{Conference paper}
\noindent Craig, Anthony, and Brandon Valeriano. 2016. “Conceptualising Cyber Arms Races.” In 2016 8th International Conference on Cyber Conflict: Cyber Power, edited by N. Pissanidis, H. Rõigas, and M. Veenendaal, 141–158. Tallinn, Estonia: NATO CCD DOE Publication.
\textbf{News or magazine article}
\noindent Irwin, Sandra. 2021. “DoD Space Agency: Cyber Attacks, Not Missiles, Are the Most Worrisome Threat to Satellites.” Space News, April 14. https://spacenews.com/dod-space-agency-cyber-attacks-not-missiles-are-the-most-worrisome-threat-to-satellites
\textbf{Thesis or dissertation}
\noindent Hauptman, Allyson. 2024. “The Human Side of Adaptive Autonomy: Design Considerations for Adaptive Autonomous Teammates.” PhD dissertation, Clemson University.
\textbf{Web page}
\noindent It is often sufficient to describe websites in the text (“As of November 15, 2023, Google’s privacy policy stated . . .”) or as a footnote. If a more formal citation is needed, it may be styled like:
Google. 2023. “Privacy Policy.” Privacy and Terms. Effective November 15. https://policies.google.com/privacy.
\textbf{Directive / Instruction}
\noindent Department of Defense. 2019. “DoD Instruction 8500.01: Cybersecurity.” DoD Chief Information Officer, October 7. \url{https://www.esd.whs.mil/Portals/54/Documents/DD/issuances/dodi/850001_2014.pdf}
\textbf{Doctrine / Field Manual / Military Regulation }
\noindent Joint Chiefs of Staff. 2017. Countering air and missile threats. JP 3-01, Washington, DC, \url{https://www.jcs.mil/Portals/36/Documents/Doctrine/pubs/jp1_ch1.pdf}
\textbf{Strategy Document}
\noindent U.S. Department of Defense. 2018. The Department of Defense Cyber Strategy. \url{https://dodcio.defense.gov/Portals/0/Documents/Library/CyberStrategy2018.pdf}
% ==================================
\end{document}
\endinput
%%
%% End of file `template-cdrarticle.tex'.
