I am using natbib package in my project, which has \documentclass{report}, and I am using apalike style for my bibliography. I am currently using v2.overleaf to write my document. Everything was working so far, but now when I add any more references in my document's .bib file, the citations in my document change from author, date (I mostly used \citep(something), they change to numbers. It looks like there is a limit on the number of references.
I cannot seem to find what the problem is, but here is some info:
I have used 48 references so far, and adding the 49th lead to this problem (I have no idea if this is related or not)
my .bib file now has 541 lines.
I wonder if anyone has faced this problem before.
I appreciate any help guys :)
\documentclass[letterpaper,12pt]{report}
\usepackage[round]{natbib}
\begin{document}
some text here \citep{citation48}
some other text \citep{citation49}
\bibliographystyle{apalike}
{\footnotesize
\bibliography{library.bib}}
\end{document}
.bib
file shouldn't affect your document at all unless you also cite them in the document. So when you cite the 49th reference, what does the output look like? Can you edit your question to include a minimal compilable document (beginning with\documentclass{...}
and ending with\end{document}
that shows exactly how you are generating the bibliography? (No other packages should be needed in the example other thannatbib
).apalike
bibliography style is only set up to generate authoryear-style citation call-outs. If you're getting numeric-style citation call-outs all of a sudden, something very odd must have happened. Without access to your code, it's unfortunately not possible to offer a definitive diagnosis. Real quick: did you check (a) that there's no additional\bibliographystyle
instruction lurking around somewhere and (b) that thenatbib
package isn't all of a sudden being loaded with the optionnumbers
?natbib
documentation also says The natbib package will automatically switch to numerical mode if any one of the \bibitem entries fails to conform to the possible author–year formats. There is no way to override this, since such an entry would cause trouble in the author–year mode. So perhaps a mal-formed entry is the problem.