Is it appropriate to include a List/Summary of Theorems in a paper? I am 16 years old at the time of writing (so I have no supervisors to seek advice from), and I'm working on a Mathematics paper at the moment, which I plan on submitting to a journal for publication. In the paper I have about 9 lemmas and theorems in total; they are all just formulaic (by formulaic, I mean that they are all just formulae rather than an idea or property about something, eg for argument's sake the quadratic or cubic formula).
Is it a good idea for me to include a list/summary of lemmas and theorems in the paper after my introduction, or should I simply include a couple of the main results in the introduction and not bother with a list of formulae I establish?
It just seems to me that to see all of the results without a summary near the beginning would be quite hard; you'd have to scroll down many pages.
Thank you for your advice.
If the lemmas and theorems are unrelated (unlikely) then a list might be fine. But if the purpose of the paper is to prove the main theorem(s) then giving that purpose and naming just those in the introduction is probably more standard and easier for a reader to get a sense of purpose.
So, my guess is that your second suggestion works better. If there is one main theorem then focus, primarily, on that. But if one or two of the others has some independent use then you could expand a bit.
Mathematicians are used to following a train of proof through a fairly long argument, but knowing the goal ahead of time can be helpful.