On conference abstract based on my research lab job, not university where I am currently an undergraduate, should I include university affiliation? I am an undergraduate student working at a National research institute (I call it NatLab), not my University (Acme U).

On a proposed abstract for a conference which one of my coworkers will be presenting our work, my name is tentatively listed along with NatLab, but not Acme U.

Should I ask to also include Acme U in the affiliations?

EDIT: The reason that I suggested that my question question is related to, but not identical to the link below is that there are a few subtle differences between my question and the link.

First, I am still considered to be a student at my University while working for Natlab, and my university is associated with Natlab (they collaborate heavily, and I believe they co-fund Natlab).

The second is that I will be applying to graduate school at my Acme U (among other places), and I am hoping to avoid stepping on any toes.

Having said that, I believe I will still lean towards the answer provided in the link, and I do think it encompasses what I need, but if anyone has any other opinions, I would be happy to hear them.

Possibly related: For paper based on thesis, should I list my university as affiliation or the name of the company I currently work for?

Usually people include their new institution under "current address" on papers, and I think you could do the same for abstracts & posters.

So you can ask them to list you under Acme U and include Natlab as your new address.


The Downsides of Doing Undergraduate, Masters, PhD at the same institution A bit of background: I attend University A. I have done all of my studying so far at University A. I completed my undergraduate degree in Faculty 1, I will complete my masters in Faculty 2, and I am considering applying to do a masters (track to PhD) in Faculty 3 to study a new field. (I can clarify the field jumping if needed, but not sure if it's necessary)

I understand that if somebody started out in chemistry, for example, that doing an undergraduate, masters, and a PhD at the same institution could have some career downsides (smaller network, access to the same resources, etc). In this case, it seems clear to me that there is an added benefit of doing a PhD at another institution.

In my case, however, I have been in multiple faculties within the same institution. If I were to apply and do a masters/PhD in a different faculty at my university (University A) then it's not as clear to me what the potential downsides would be for an academic career after the PhD.

So I am curious what the opportunity cost of pursuing a new field at the same institution is, and ultimately, having finished ones entire academic career at one institution.

Normally the downside of studying at a single university is that the student sees and interacts over the years with fewer ideas since they keep coming from the same people. Once a person gets a degree from a university department, they may have been exposed to a set of viewpoints smaller than what is available if they looked wider. In other words, you can get into a mental rut.

But that doesn't seem to be the case here since, I expect, that your set of contacts even though in a single university is quite wide.

But you might, just for fun, talk to a few of your most trusted faculty contacts and ask them whether it is time for you to move on or good to stay. If you are a highly valued student, then there may be a bit of selfishness in their answer, so watch out for that. But if you detect such, then it is surely time to move on.

Over your career you want to develop and maintain a wide network of collaborators. If you can do that while still based in a single place, then you should be fine.


Should I contact the journal after "with editor" for two months? I submitted a paper to an Elsevier journal two months ago. I checked the status today and it was "with editor". I understand the reviewing process may take a while, but apparently it is not under review yet. I did a bit research and found that most papers in the journal are accepted less than 6 months. I am wondering if it is appropriate for me to send inquiry message to the editor in this case? Or a more general question is how long should I wait till sending them inquiry/reminder messages. Thanks.

You can always send a message to an editor to enquire about the status of your manuscript. But, you need to consider a few basic points.

First, try to assess how the journal operates, for example what time frames are usually met by people submitting work to the journal. Try also to see what is considered the norm in your field (assuming this journal is in that field). Since the way journals operate varies between both fields and amongst the journals themselves, you need to assess what is a reasonable time.

Second, Try to see if you can figure out what this message "with the editor" means. I would interpret it as not having been sent out for review yet. If that is true then it seems like posing a question would be timely. If the message indicates the paper may also be under review or possibly even back after review for the editor to evaluate, then two months is certainly not too long. So, understanding the process stages and how the messages relate to these may help you decide whether a request is timely or not.

Editors, should not mind responding to brief questions of this sort but if it is clear from their point that the request is clearly premature, it will add to the stress. In other words, an assessment from your side of the normal waiting time along with an appropriate question is a good ground for the communication. Such an assessment can be made by asking your peers and others who have submitted to the journal. You can also kindly ask the editor to provide some insights into the time frame of the review process. It is after all not uncommon that authors may be more or less ready to handle revisions at different times and knowing what to expect is therefore useful.


Geographic differences in bioethics and effect on experimental research in biology Cultural heritage may have influenced views on life, consciousness, etc. Does it mean that bioethics is different in different countries? And does it mean that e.g. in  Israel (Jewish culture) it is possible to carry out experiments forbidden in India (Hindu culture)?

More generally: How do bioethics vary in different countries?

The short answer to your question is yes, there are differences in local laws related to bioethical concerns in different countries (and even different states in the same country).

For example, consider the difference in local laws related to stem cell research. According to Wikipedia (I don't know how up-to-date this is):

  These laws have been the source of much controversy and vary significantly by country. In the European Union, stem cell research using the human embryo is permitted in Sweden, Finland, Belgium, Greece, Britain, Denmark and the Netherlands; however, it is illegal in Germany, Austria, Ireland, Italy, and Portugal. The issue has similarly divided the United States, with several states enforcing a complete ban and others giving financial support. Elsewhere, Japan, India, Iran, Israel, South Korea, China, and Australia are supportive. However, New Zealand, most of Africa (except South Africa), and most of South America (except Brazil) are restrictive.

More broadly, the International Compilation of Human Research Standards (compiled by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services) lists relevant laws and guidelines on human subjects research around the world.

Regarding

  does it mean that e.g. in Israel (Jewish culture) it is possible to carry out experiments forbidden in India (Hindu culture)?

Civic and legislative systems are highly complex, as are the degrees and the ways in which they are affected by cultural and religious influences.
So reducing Israel to "Jewish culture" and India to "Hindu culture" is not a particularly useful way to reason about what is permissible in each country.


Carry your PhD project with you to post-doc and beyond Say you develop your own research project during your PhD years and want to carry on the research project with you to post-doctoral and beyond, are there any restriction that you can or cannot carry on the project?

From a career perspective, it's a bad idea to carry your PhD project as your primary work further into your career. It's perfectly normal for people to finish up the publication of papers related to one phase in a later phase of their career, but it's not so good to keep working on basically the same project.

The reason for this is that you don't want to be "pigeonholed" as a researcher who only studies a narrow topic. In most fields, it's not conducive to a successful career, because it makes a researcher look as if uninterested in other research fields (even if that's not the case).

So even if the funding and willingness of the advisors is available to support such a path, it's not one you should follow (absent a very specific reason to do so).


Including articles in submission in "refereed publications" section of CV? I have a section for "refereed publications" and one for "other publications".
Where should I put publications that are presently in submission?
Is it OK to put them in "refereed publications"?

If you submit them to a journal that will referee them then put them in the refereed publications and mark them "submitted - under consideration" or similar. Just make it clear.

And update the CV as needed if you get accepted or rejected.

An alternative, if permitted, is a third section for submitted work under consideration or even work in progress with submitted works tagged as submitted. My preference (for myself) would be "Work in Progress". Sending that signal can help you.


Advice on whether to pursue a PhD or not I know this question has been beaten to death over here, but I'm still not sure what to do in my case. I've been given an offer to do a PhD in electrical engineering in a top 10 university and I'm very confused on whether to accept the offer or not.

Initially I only applied for the MS program and a PhD was not something I wanted. After a few professors interviewed me, they asked me to consider changing my application from MS to MS/PhD and mentioned how much I would be paying if I did MS only since there is absolutely no funding for MS students. I was worried about the cost of going to grad school without funding, so I caved in and changed my application to MS/PhD.

For starters, I don't know if I am willing to put the time necessary for completing the PhD: I somewhat like the things I would do research on if I accepted the offer (information theory and coding theory), but I wouldn't call myself passionate about the subject or any subject in electrical engineering for that matter. Also, my priority (and possibly the only thing important to me right now) is financial security and being as financially "well-off" as possible, so would doing a PhD really make a difference in that regard if it's from a top university? This is the only case where I would be willing to put in the effort for PhD.

Please note that I am not asking people to decide for me, I am asking for different perspectives or points of view to make the decision easier for me.

So if you accept a PhD offer in the US, you can normally leave in the middle with a master's. This is better than enrolling in a master's program since you don't have to pay (in fact, you'll get paid a small stipend). I recommend researching your institution's policy on this.

If this is the case, you can begin your PhD program now and then decide in a few years whether to leave with the master's or finish the PhD. I do not know whether the PhD is a good investment in your long term financial plans, but I'm reasonably certain you will need more than a bachelor's.


What is "target decision date" in sciencedirect-publishing journal? According to the information retrieved from EVISE supporting agent, my revised submission was undergoing the second round of review. I have found out that both referees missed their target deadline (without any request for further extension).

The agent also tried to persuade that the submission will have final decision soon; (s)he called it as 'Target decision date'.

Here are the questions I would like to know:
1) Is it common that the reviewers returns their comments late?
2) Have anyone experienced 'Target decision date'?

Kindly regards,

Unfortunately it is all too common for some reviewers to be delinquent in their manuscript returns. In particular in traditional academic publishers. Often reviewers are professors/researchers with multiple hats in academia including writing up their own research.  I would agree with the previous answer that a target decision date is a way for editors to try and push all reviewers to respond.

One example where the turnover is quick(er) is the highly structure online journals like Frontier or PLOS. In the former the turnover is ±14 days for most journals and article submission. The second review process is also around 14 days so all in all about 5-6 week turnaround depending on the quality of the manuscript.


What should I do if I cannot accept any of the hypotheses in a replicated experiment? Before I start explaining my situation, I would like to say that I have read the other questions on this topic but I cannot find what I need on 100%. I am a bachelor student and I am working on my bachelor thesis. The main activity of this thesis is to make a replicated experiment. The experiment involves participants to ask questions which require statistical and accounting intuitions.

After I have performed the experiment, I cannot get on 100% the same results. I know where the problem is coming from but it is too late to re-do the experiment. I am not sure what I should do. How bad is that for my work, as I cannot accept any of the hypothesis compared to the original article?

I have made an extension but I cannot accept the hypothesis of this extension as there are no statistical reasons to do so. I am capable of arguing about why the hypotheses failed to be accepted but I am sure if it is nice to fail at your hypotheses.

I have never written an academic paper before.

Regard Boris

Honestly report about the results you have achieved, including any errors and omissions in the method that have occurred, or any reasons why you think the results are not as expected.

If you produce a good analysis and report, then it won't matter so much that the results were not as expected.

The point of a bachelor thesis is mainly to demonstrate that the student is capable of applying the skills learned over the prior years in a larger setting. The goal is not to produce original publishable results.


Should I cite R or RStudio? I ran my data analysis and created my graphs in RStudio, but RStudio is just a platform for R. In my paper should I cite R or RStudio?

RStudio is an IDE for R — essentially an editor and debugger packed together. Your work is made possible by statisticians who developed the language R and graphical packages for it. If you want to cite R in your publication, here is the explanation how to do it.


How do I get to know/work with academics during my master's degree? I am in my first year of my master's degree in Europe, and within a year or so I'll have to be sending out applications for a PhD (always in Europe), for which I need 2 to 3 recommendation letters. This is a huge issue  for me because I pretty much don't know anyone inside academia.

Recommendation letters should be written from people inside academia who know you, which I suppose means they worked with you on something.  The only person I worked with was my bachelor's thesis advisor, but I changed institution for my master's degree so I'm not in contact with him anymore. I also need to complete a thesis (equivalent to a semester of full work) for my master's degree, so I will have another thesis advisor eventually, but by the time I can start working on my thesis I will already have to be sending out PhD applications. Is it possible to work with academics in other ways than writing a thesis? Or is it otherwise possible to have an academic know you to the point of being able of writing a reference letter, without necessarily having worked with you?

Anyway this is not just a matter of recommendation letters. I think that having people in academia know and recognize me would give me better chances in getting admitted to a good PhD program. Moreover, it's nice to have someone to ask for advice when you need it.

I think for people who are already into their PhD it's easier, since at least you're put inside a research group and have your own advisor. But as a master's degree student I don't feel like I have many opportunities to establish contact with academics.

Since you appear to be in Italy – actually a fellow citizen! – I'll try to give an answer from an Italian perspective. As a master's student, you usually have three possibilities to work with professors:

start working on your master's thesis;
apply for a teaching assistant position for one of the classes;
do an internship.

For what concerns possibilities 2 and 3, these may be available or not depending on university, field, year etc. For instance, I have TAs from both bachelor's and master's levels and I'd be happy to provide recommendation letters for them, as I did for others in the past.

If none of the above work for you, you can try asking professors whose classes you attended, getting top grades. In this case, however, they might not be willing to provide a recommendation letter. In fact, up to a few years ago, I wasn't willing either, as I explained in this answer. Nowadays, I accept (even though I don't approve of this practice) that recommendation letters are required almost everywhere, and I'm more willing to provide recommendation letters to students who attended my classes and somehow positively caught my attention (at the exam, through in-class questions, during office hours).


Accepted by potential thesis supervisor while still waiting to hear back from two others. How to respond? I wanted to know your opinion about this: I had interviews (separate) with three professors that they know each other. One of them which is not my first choice has accepted me, the others still have not answered. How should I reply to his email? Is it okay (=accepted) to tell him I am waiting for other professors' answers? I am asking since the fact that he accepted me I see it as a favor, so I am not sure if it is polite or nice to tell him I am waiting for other professors' decisions. What do you think?

P.S. The reason that I contacted all of them at the same time is that they have a deadline for choosing students, so if I had missed them or none of them took me, I would have to wait sometime with no supervisor.

I think it's perfectly ok to let the professor who's accepted you know that you are waiting to hear back from another opportunity before deciding what to do. There's no need to be any more specific than that. Ask the professor if there's a deadline that you need to tell him your decision by. If it's soon, you could even let the other professors know that you have an offer in hand and need to decide soon. This may speed up their decision.

Don't worry that the professors will think negatively towards you for this. It's a very common situation to be in, and academics understand that students will have their own preferences for who they want to work with. Just make sure you are polite and not pushy in your communications with them.


Is it appropriate to "shop" through high-impact journals before sending the paper to more specialized journals? I have recently finished writing my first paper for my PhD study. I believe I have made some discoveries, but by comparing my manuscript to previous work, I think the advance is not very big and the work should be published on specialized journal in my field.

However, my supervisor does not agree with me and he really wants to try publishing it on a high-impact journal. I have talked multiple times with him, listing the novelty and limitations of my study, as well as the journals that previous work mostly published on. But he put my suggested journals on the last positions of his list, saying that he hope my work should be read by more people. Other students in my lab told me that they have met similar scenarios before.

Up to now we have tried Nature Communications, eLife and Current Biology, all being rejected without full scale peer-review. The review editors in one journal point out some limitations in my study, and we addressed them before submitting again; the other two turned my manuscript down without pointing specific problems.

My questions are:

Is it appropriate to "shop" through high-impact journals (all getting desk rejections) before submitting to specialized journals, with modifications made if specific suggestions have been received?
How can I talk to my mentor to reduce publication time for my future papers?

Judging the value of work is subjective, and can differ significantly between different researchers.

There is not harm in trying high-impact journals if some experienced people (like your mentor) consider it worth-while. But if you tried three different journals and get more or less immediate rejections, you should probably aim lower. Otherwise you just waste time in waiting for another five rejections (and you also waste the time of the editors/reviewers).

Maybe, after three rejections, you can discuss this topic with your mentor again, mentioning that you don't want to wait another three years for your paper to be published.


How to correct the missing citation counts/citing References in the adsabs.harvard? How could we correct the missing citation counts and the missing citing References in the adsabs.harvard?

For example, I find that other resources such as https://inspirehep.net/ that have much precise and better citation counts, while both the Google Scholar and adsabs.harvard misses some citation counts/missing citing References.

These three resources have their own advantages and disadvantages:

1) Google Scholar: Google scholar miss citations from arXiv (sometimes but not always).

2) adsabs.harvard: In principle, it counts everything in arXiv, but even if so, the bib format citations may be missing -- perhaps it is the LaTex generating issue.

3) https://inspirehep.net, it only counts articles that are relevant to particle physics, high-energy theory, quantum field and string theory. It misses other disciplines such as Atomic-Molecule Optics or Condensed Matter physics.

I am happy to receive comments from experts working in all disciplines.

For NASA's ADS at least, there's a "submit missing references" form available here.


Is it okay to upload slides based on others papers? In some seminar classes, one student presents a paper selected from top conferences or journals with the help of slides. Usually, there is a lot of discussion about the strengths and weaknesses of the papers. The plots or figures are usually not prepared from scratch for the slides, but are copied from the paper by taking screenshots. But is it legal or even ethical to publish these slides online?

It is almost certainly a copyright violation in the US. It's probably also defensible via a fair use argument (in court!). I think that the odds of getting sued or DMCA takedown noticed are pretty low, but I still wouldn't encourage the practice of uploading the property of others to the Internet without their permission. That's a reasonably big ethics issue for me. The easiest thing to do might be to use a placeholder figure "See Figure 2 page 6", or similar, in the uploaded material. You might also try asking the publisher for reproduction permissions. They all have a process, and it ought to be free and easy for purposes of commentary.


Why are some sources cited twice in a bibliography, once with DOI and once with arXiv? Just to clarify what I mean, I have seen some review articles that have bibliography items like this:

  Bloggs, J., "The Paper that has Been Written", The Journal Title,
  Series Number, page number(s), (year). [DOI] [arXiv link]

where both [DOI] and [arXiv link] are hyperlinks to the paper, the former to its webpage on the journal website (with which it was published), the latter to its arXiv webpage.

Does the author cite twice just in case someone is reading it who might not have access to journals? Or is there another reason?

I agree with Dave Clarke.  I think the primary purpose of a bibliography should be to offer the reader a way to read the cited material.  A version of the paper on the arXiv achieves this goal better than any other means I know.  However, it's also important that the cited material has been verified.  By citing the journal version of the paper, the author communicates that it has been.


Is there a network map of subjects and how they connect with each other? The problem

When doing a literature review at the start of a process of addressing a specific problem, it's easy to miss related material, if I don't know that it is related.

The example

Let's say I'm looking at a particular electricity-generation  problem relating to pollution costs (in a very broad sense), of combustion and cooling: there might be relevant papers about,  say, biodiversity and temperature in river water, that I don't know about, and haven't made the connection to, and it appears in a journal well outside the field of electricity generation.

However, within the literature, there will be authors whose papers span those fields: work on valuing biodiversity (so that loss of biodiversity represents a quantifiable cost), and the effect on biodiversity of changing river temperatures (so that using river-cooling in electricity generation, has a deleterious effect on river biodiversity).

The proposition

It should be possible, by doing an analysis of keywords, of co-authorship, and of journals, to automate the building of a network of subjects and of authors, to map out interconnections between specific narrow subject areas, and find the people that work in those interconnecting areas.

The question

Is there such a network map of subjects and authors, anywhere? Not just for this specific example, but one that spans a very wide range of literature (e.g. Engineering, Science, Technology, Economics). Ideally, one that gets updated frequently, based on ongoing publications?

As I hope the example above illustrates, it has to be:

easy to interrogate it;
very detailed on subject linkages; and
provide links between people as well as subjects.

Here is a subject map of science:

It is taken from the following paper, freely available from Plos One:

http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0039464?imageURI=info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0039464.g001

I think that this is the sort of thing that you are interested in.

N.B. I am not a co-author, nor have I read the paper, so I make no judgment on its quality.


How do I add my ORCID to papers authored by myself? I have a few papers that have already been accepted and published.
I recently signed up for an ORCID.
Is is possible to add my ORCID to these already published papers,
and if so, how do I do this?

Response to comment
Ideally, I would like my ORCID to be listed on the paper itself or on the official website of the journal article.
Nevertheless, I would consider having the paper listed on my ORCID profile to be a good partial solution.

I don't know if it is possible to add your ORCID directly to the paper in question (probably not), but it is possible to link to the paper from your ORCID profile.

Go to your ORCID account (signing in if necessary)
This should bring up a page with your "Biography", which consists of several collapsible tabs (Education, Employment, Funding and Works).
Next to the Works tab, click on the button for "+ Add works".
You then have several different options to proceed. The quickest is "search and link" which allows you to search a database such as PubMed or CrossRef, find your paper, and add it to your profile. I won't go through the full details of each step, but if you follow the instructions on screen, it should hopefully guide you through.


Tips for managing a panel at a conference My advisor invited me to host a panel at a conference next week because she is on vacation and of course I said yes right away without thinking.

But now I realize I should asked more questions, because I don’t really know what to do.

What are some good tips on how to be a great host for a panel? For ex, maybe I should get everyone’s presentation in advance on the same pin drive so we don’t need to switch between presentations all the time. That’s obvious. But what else?

If you had a bit more time, I'd suggest that you contact each of the participants and ask them a few questions. It may be too late for that, but they will probably want to know the order of presentation.

They will certainly want to know how much time they each have and how you should (or should not) signal them as the end of their slot approaches.

You need to know how questions from the audience are handled at the conference - after each presentation - all together at the end - not at all. Make sure that there is time for questions, if allowed.

If someone ends early, it is usually appropriate to delay the start of the next speaker so that those people who want to hear only part of the panel have time to arrive and/or leave without disruption. But that may vary with local custom.

If possible, try to meet the presenters before the panel session.

Coordinate with any volunteers that are available for such things as water or special needs.

Get there early to make sure the setup is correct.


Do tenure-track search committees using mathjobs.org receive revisions to job applications after the initial submission date? this is a somewhat specific question aimed especially at people who have experienced in serving in tenure-track search committees that use Mathjobs.Org.

Many of the job descriptions say something in the lines of "Review of applications will start on 1 November" (or any other date) or "For full consideration please apply before November 1", etc.

The question is: I am waiting for a couple of papers to be accepted (already have reviews, but no official acceptance since the editorial process sometimes takes longer). I know that applications can be updated in Mathjobs. Do the committees print all the Mathjobs application on November 1, or they look at them online? I'm asking because if I update it, say, on November 15 (suppose a paper is accepted by then), then maybe the won't even look at the updated version and only at the old one. On the other hand, if I don't apply now and wait until Nov 15, maybe it will also be ignored since it will be too late.

Do you have any particular recommendations?

It's relatively easy to download a set of applications from mathjobs.org as a huge .pdf file.  In our last search, the committee members looked at the applications in that way rather than looking at them online.  Thus in our first round of evaluations we would have missed any updates that were submitted after the deadline.  For candidates that made it to the phone interview stage, we did keep track of updates to the application, but in most cases the applicant sent us an email saying "...  Also, my paper XXXX was just accepted for publication in YYYY..."

Thus I wouldn't count on any update to your mathjobs application that comes after the deadline being seen by the search committee.  If you do update the appliction, you should probably send an email to the search committee chair.


Forgot to email a professor back about a research opportunity. What to expect? First off, I messed up big time here. I'm applying for a Fulbright academic fellowship after having finished my undergrad last year.

This spring, I figured I would email some potential advisors and get a head start on my application. I found one that was a good match with my previous work, and she agreed that she could host me as long as I got the scholarship in the end. (edit to be clear: the start date was clearly stated in our initial correspondence, contingent on me getting the scholarship)

But this coincided with a move to Europe (I was there for 6 months on a research scholarship) - I know this is no excuse, but just to explain the circumstances better - and I forgot to reply to her.

I sent her an email now apologizing profusely, expressing my understanding that she might not want to host me any longer, and explaining the circumstances to her (i.e. if she was still willing to discuss this further). I wanted to let her know that I wasn't shopping around for other opportunities, and am only emailing her back after so long because I couldn't find anything; on the contrary, our research interests align well (it's not a huge country and this is just about the only research group that works in my field anyway).

I'm operating under the assumption that she's going to say no, but lesson learned for next time. I'm just wondering how big of an offense I committed here?

I have a friend who did something similar. She didn't realize she had a job offer on her voice mail for several months. In this case, the job opening still existed and she still qualified, so they hired her anyways. I don't think there's any reason why this has to be any different.

On the other hand, she could quite possibly have moved on to other things or hosted someone else in your absence, in which case it might just be unfeasible for her to pick you up after all this time.

And there are many people who would refuse you just on the principal that you made a mistake. I've certainly met plenty of them.

At the end of the day, you've probably done all you can to rectify the situation. If she denies you, just move on with life. If she doesn't, buy her some cookies and be happy. :)


As a postdoc, how to harmonize increasing independence with relation with your supervisor I am a postdoc with a double affiliation (I belong to two groups in different departments but same institution). As such, I work under main supervisor A and under secondary supervisor B, meaning that most of my funding comes from A, who also is officially appointed as my superior. I work mostly on common projects between A and B, but also on A's and B's independent projects, and some of my own stuff.

I am currently working towards further independence, which is in principle the purpose of a postdoc. This involves participating in grant writing and decision making, for example choosing which conferences to go, journals to publish, more flexibility in the approach to problem solving, etc.

Recently, I got funding to hire two people from a successful grant I wrote with A. I was responsible for designing most of the scientific part, as well as risk management, scheduling, etc. Because of my involvement in the project preparation, A wants me to also be involved in interviewing and selecting applicants. We also decided that the most convenient way to articulate these positions (in terms of accessing resources) is for them to be in a double-affiliation scheme between A's and B's group, just as me. Obviously, B agreed to this since they benefit from two new appointments at no (money) cost to them. And obviously B was also invited to participate in the interviews and selection process.

Already after the applicant selection has started, B seems to be making somewhat erratic applicant assessments which go against mine and A's judgement. We thought this was very strange because their assessments did not appear to make much sense to us, until B eventually openly added that my opinion should not be taken into account. At this point the whole story put together seems to point to the direction that B basically wants to undermine my input in the decision making process.

This is not an isolated incident. B has also been increasing the control that they exert over my work. I get the feeling that B somehow feels threatened by my increasing scientific independence and somehow wants to let me know "what is my place". Incidentally, and probably adding to the problem, B is not much more senior than me and is trying to establish their research group.

How can I defuse this situation such that I do not burn bridges with B: a bad relation with B could hurt my chances to progress in B's department. At the same time, I want to progress in my independence, and this obviously involves being part of personnel selection and project design.

As I and others have said many times in this forum, the appropriate method to resolve such problems is communication.

It doesn't help anyone if everyone just interprets each others words and behavior without any factual knowledge what they really mean. Write B an email with content such as

Dear B,
I've given the issue of how we try to hire our graduate students for
project X some thought, and I think we're pulling in slightly different
directions. I think it would be good if we could exchange a few
ideas to make sure we're on the same page with this.

Would you be available for lunch on Thursday to talk this over?

Point being that you make implicit assumptions on why B behaves the way he does. Your assumptions may make sense, or they may not -- I suspect the latter, given that you call his actions "erratic", "feeling threatened", "wants to undermine" you. This is not how most people behave. Most people have very rational reasons to behave the way they do, but you may simply not know what these reasons are, and you will not find out if you don't talk it over in a frank conversation between colleagues.

I would suspect that ultimately both of you have the same goal, namely making this research collaboration a success, because that is in the interest of both of your careers. On the other hand, "putting someone in their place" is not in either of your interest (in particular, not in the interest of B either if it jeopardizes the collaboration). That would imply that you ascribe B's actions to the wrong motivations, and it is on both of you to clear things up.


Choosing an adviser based on the professor's past students' jobs I have recently been a admitted to a top 20 math Phd program at one of the schools I really wanted (woohoo!).  The reason I wanted this school is because I have been really into a certain research topic and, after a lot of "stalking" I found a professor at this department who's research interests matched mine really well.  Now that I've been admitted and am more seriously considering my working with him, I noticed that he's graduated seven other Phd students.  After a bit more googling I realized only 1 out of these 7 got an academic job and even this job was as a lecturer at a small liberal arts college. The others got jobs in industry (rather high paying ones so good for them).

My question is as follows: Is this evidence that working with this professor would make me unlikely to get an academic job involving research (post doc, assistant professor, etc ..) after my Phd?

This guy's research is dope and I really want in on it, but I also have to take my future goals into account.  I'm pretty ignorant on the process of getting academic jobs so any extra information or clarification of any misconceptions it seems like I have (in addition to an answer to the question) would be of help.

Perhaps the jobs they got are what they wanted to do - I doubt they were forced into them...

You will decide what jobs you will apply for which determines where you are likely to end up.

Are you using the term "dope" as in Dopey one of the seven dwarves or dope as in a drug ie not necessarily good...


My professor wants to know if his recommendation is helpful Several weeks after I received the recommendation from Professor M, he sent an email to me and asked me about the result of my application to a graduate school.  He wants to know whether his recommendation is helpful and my application is accepted or not.

Although I have submitted my application and supporting documents to the graduate admissions, the deadline for the program I have applied for is on the 18th April.

The only message I received from the graduate school was that they had received my application. I have no idea whether my application is successful or not, but the email from professor M made me nervous.

I can see that there are a lot of professors here. I guessed that some of you had written recommendation letters for your students. I would love to know this:

  What were your reactions when you heard of your students telling you that their applications failed or your recommendation letters useless?

I feel scared when thinking of this situation.

You should not be nervous about the enquiry, he just wants to know the outcome. Many academics lose track of time and/or have unrealistic expectations about how fast things move. I would respond that you haven't heard anything yet, but will let him know, regardless of the outcome, when you hear.

If you get in, he will fell happy for you and if you don't get in he will feel a little sad for you. Even if you are unsuccessful, I would not tell a letter writer that the letter was "useless". The only case I might say something like that, and I would be much more positive about it, is if you chose not to use that individual as a reference. Something like: for that position, I was limited on the number of reference I could submit and I felt my other references were a better fit for the position.


Elsevier Review Speed I've submitted a new paper to Knowledge Based Systems journal for Elsevier.

But currently, after about 3 months, its status is still "Under Review"

I have to mention that about 6 weeks after the submission, its "status date" has been changed but its status not!

May you please tell me how long I have to wait for the decision about my paper?

I've checked the paper status in journalinsight.elsevier.com. For the journal, the first decision speed time is about 7.2 weeks. But my paper is still under review after about 3 months.

Thank you

I have to mention that about 6 weeks after the submission, its "status
  date" has been changed but its status not!

The status date changed because, either the editor sent the paper for review or any of the reviewer accepted to review the manuscript. Either case is possible. The status changes/date changes occur when some step has been taken by the editorial side or reviewer side.

  May you please tell me how long I have to wait for the decision about
  my paper?

I guess, nobody can give you a numeric estimate of this duration. It is completely dependent on the reviewer and their response to the editor's reminders. As a reviewer, we get around 4 weeks to review an article. However, they may remind us once or twice or sometimes give us an extension to do so. If the reviewer is very popular (bigshot), the editors sometimes don't care much about the timing rather focus on getting a strong and bias-free review from such reviewers. That takes time.

  I've checked the paper status in journalinsight.elsevier.com. For the
  journal, the first decision speed time is about 7.2 weeks. But my
  paper is still under review after about 3 months.

I have been waiting for last 6 months (and counting) to get the very first review on my paper; not in this journal, but something similar. If you are so curious to know, you should send a very gentle email to the editor asking about it or just a hint to remind him about your article. Because, in a pile of many articles under review, the editors sometimes may not look into your article. Probably something like this:

  Dear Editor

  Could I ask you about the present status of the review of my following: submitted manuscript?
  Title: Knowledge-Based Analysis of Review period of the Journal X (ID: KBS-16-xxxxx)?

  Sincerely

  You

Remember, editors are busy persons; he many not respond to your email too. And, Computer Science/Mathematics journals often take a lot of time for review purpose -- This is well-observed fact. No proof of this hypothesis is required!


Who to contact when handling editor is anonymous and manuscript is delayed? Here a question has been asked about the ethical grounds for an editor to be anonymous from a reviewer point of view. I am facing similar problem but being an author my concerns are different. I have submitted an article to a prestigious Elsevier journal. The article went through two revisions, one major and one minor, and still under review. During all this process the handling editor never showed his identity. Currently I am facing unexpected delay in review process (5 months after minor revision). I want to send email to associate/handling editor but whenever I send email via Elsevier system I receive an unsatisfactory response from journal manager not from editor. I am not sure if he/she is seeing my emails. Is it an appropriate approach for associate/handling editor to hide the identity from an author? Is it appropriate if I write email directly to Editor in Chief? if yes, then how should I compose my email?

Is it an appropriate approach for associate/handling editor to hide the identity
  from an author?

This question has been discussed extensively in the question you linked. Whether it's "appropriate" is a difficult question, but it's not entirely uncommon and I am not sure why it would be an ethical problem. Personally, I prefer transparency over information hiding, but there are definitely arguments in both directions (and most of the time it probably simply does not matter).

  Is it appropriate if I write email directly to Editor in Chief?

Sure, why not? 5 months is a fairly long time for a minor revision, and sending an email to a person concerning an official role that (s)he voluntarily took over seems almost always ok. Whether this will change much is a different question, but it's worth a try.

  if yes, then how should I compose my email?

Short and respectfully. Avoid being combative, avoid assigning blame, and don't ask who the handling editor is so that you can bug her or him yourself. Briefly state that you have submitted a minor revision for the manuscript XXX on date YYY, that you are wondering what the cause of the delay is, and want to inquire whether a notification date can already be foreseen.


How do I know that I have truly lost interest in research and should drop out of a top CS PhD program? I am a second-year CS PhD pre-candidate in a top PhD program. During my first year, I published a first-author paper at the best conference in my area, which I know is a big accomplishment. My advisor is famous in his area and also very caring and supportive, and my labmates are great too.

The thing is my second project didn't go very well, which caused us to change the entire story right before the deadline. I worked more than 70 hours per week and gave all I could, but there was not enough time to get everything we need in a good shape, and my advisor was frustrated with the progress and pointed out problems that I hadn't seen everywhere. I continued to work, but found myself too frustrated and suddenly lost all interest in research, stopped caring about papers, did as best I could to avoid talking to anyone, and want to leave this place and never come back. I know most PhDs somehow have this feeling, but I notice that this time it's quite serious:

Forcing myself to work resulted in a breakdown every night with the feeling that all I did was nonsense and meaningless.
My first paper has now become a joke, laughing at me that I could never publish with my own efforts.
I have no intention to participate in lab communication and truly don't want to talk to anyone. I can't even bear to hear others typing due to the feeling that I am the only one who doesn't make progress.

How can I know if I truly have lost my interest in research (and should drop my Ph.D.), or if this is something that I can overcome? After all,  if this is the best I can do, why not go somewhere else and use my skills to actually contribute rather than wasting everybody's time? I am so tired of receiving new tasks at 4 am or 11 pm due the next day. I would highly appreciate your advice!

If available, I would immediately seek out the university counseling services (as mentioned in a comment by @Nate Eldredge ) The things you are mentioning could be symptoms of depression. Or, you may just need some strategies for coping with failure. Often people with your accomplishments haven't experienced much failure in their lives!

Taking advantage of the (usually low-cost or free, if you are in the U.S.) counselling services at the university will help you sort out which of these things it is. Your counselor can also help you come up with strategies to make well-reasoned life decisions for yourself (or with your committee). Regardless, don't make any rash decisions.

In the U.S., it is very common for PhD students to deal with these issues and to seek out counseling. An informal straw poll in my PhD cohort revealed that 90% of us had done so, and approximately 60% were on anti-anxiety medication or continued treatment regimes at any given time. The older students even began to organize a yearly workshop to talk about stress and how to get the help you need!

An update: This 2018 study finds that graduate students are 6x more likely to experience depression and anxiety, compared to the general population.
https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2018/03/06/new-study-says-graduate-students-mental-health-crisis


The usage of citation signals such as 'see': commonly used? When I paraphrase a direct idea from someone, I'd just end the sentence with (John 2010, p. 10). However and sometimes (especially while analyzing to support my claim), I use the citation signal known as 'see' to support an idea.

For example: The company can benefit from its long history (see Company X 2002, para. 1) (where the source 'Company X' does NOT clearly state the idea of the company benefiting from its history but rather 'agree' with my statement since it states that the history of the company dates back to 100 years ago for example).

From Wikipedia:

  “See” indicates that the cited authority clearly supports, but does not directly state the proposition given.

I see that such signals are mainly used in legal matters, is their usage in regular academic writing acceptable? I'm using Harvard.

That is the clear intention on how the word 'see' is to be used before citation, i.e., to support the claim you make. However, it is not always the case that the common reader would be able to differentiate the intention of use. That is why I usually state it clear when writing the similar case.

  The company can benefit from its long history. X et al. (Company X 2002, para. 1) support this claim.

But, it is perfectly acceptable to use the formal norms of writing; the usage of 'see' as you've stated. Just keep in mind the expertise of the readers you are targeting.


Difference between research question and research objective What is the difference between research question and research objective?

In my opinion, every research question can be paraphrased as a research objective and vice versa. Am I right?

Although the specific formal definition can be field specific, Farrugia et al do a nice job of laying out "research questions", "hypotheses", and "objectives" in their open access article (linked above). Note their article targets medical researchers, but applies to other fields as well.

To summarize/highlight their definitions:

Research questions "arise out of a perceived knowledge deficit within a subject area or field of study." These may be answered either using literature reviews or primary research.
Research hypothesis are the formal ideas one seeks to test. (The linked article focuses on null hypothesis test, Chamberlin (reprinted in Science 1965, first published in Science in the late-1800s)) does a better job of explaining hypotheses. Chamberlin advocates for multiple working hypotheses where you have multiple competing ideas.,
Research objectives "should be coupled with the hypothesis of the study". These are what the study specifically seeks to do. (e.g., what is to be measured to test a hypothesis?).


USA (or worldwide) Equivalent of H2020-ITN program I am involved in the preparation of a project proposal. If you are from Europe and you do research the chances are high that you have heard of the Horizon 2020 (H2020) programme. For the ones who are not from Europe or don't know,  H2020 is the biggest EU Research and Innovation programme ever with nearly €80 billion of funding available over 7 years (2014 to 2020), more info here.

This programme, like many others,  is divided into different sections and specific calls. One of them is the Innovative Training Network (ITN) call.

The Innovative Training Networks (ITN) aim to train a new generation of creative, entrepreneurial and innovative early-stage researchers, able to face current and future challenges and to convert knowledge and ideas into products and services for economic and social benefit.

Basically, if the project proposal gets accepted you can have funding for several PhD students located at different universities or industries in Europe and you can do research on a common macro-topic (e.g., Automotive, Medical Robotics, Skin Cancer). There will be exchanges between research laboratories and workshops/trainings activities.

My question is: by reading the description above, do you know about any program like that in USA or anywhere else outside of Europe?

So far, I found only this programme (based in USA).

Thanks in advance.

The closest analogue for this mechanism in the US may be among those available through the NSF Division of Graduate Education (DGE) - see active opportunities here. The training topics involved are often very macro-level.


What to do when graduate admissions haven't gone well? OK, here is the deal:

I am a computer science student in Turkey graduating this June. I have applied to PhD programs in the US to work in computer architecture. I have a decent bachelor's degree, and my college is reasonably respected. Before admissions, I contacted some professors, and they seemed very interested in my background. During admissions, I was interviewed by some other professors. However, it turned out that there was only one offer with a scholarship, which I decided not to accept. (You may ask why I didn't opt for that one, the response may make the issue personal. But at least I can say that I didn't waste a resource that can be used by someone more enthusiastic about it.)

Now, I am in the middle of nowhere. The opportunity to work in computer architecture in my country is really small. During my bachelor's studies, I took all computer architecture related courses, even graduate ones. Plus, I almost missed all the graduate program admissions in Europe (with scholarships).

What do you think are my options? My idea is to get into a graduate program and be an academic.

I may start a master's degree in my country, but the area most professors teach that most relates to my studies is embedded systems. In fact, I doubt whether this may take me away from my intentions.
I can reapply during spring term admissions. (I have been told that these admissions are way more selective than during the fall term and this brings extra financial cost.)
I may work in the industry for a year, then reapply. (But how about my new profile for admissions? Plus, who wants someone, who is probably leaving soon, to hire?)

So I need some serious advice.

Here is some information about me: I have 3.6 overall and 3.85 major GPA. 6 different people have written references for me.

Do you want to go to industry or academia?

Turning down a scholarship to reserve the money for someone more "enthusiastic about it" sounds at odds with "my idea was to ... be academician [sic]".

If you want to work in industry, unless it's for some deep part of, for example, Google or AT&T, I would recommend getting a Master's wherever and begin getting real-world experience.

If you want to be an academic (and so almost absolutely need a PhD) then you should find people from Turkey who did something like what you are trying to do and get in contact with/ emulate them.

At the risk of being provocative and with the caveat that I doubt this is the main issue, your message gives the sense that money is an issue. It is for many of us- but consider if you conveyed that in an unproductive way as you tried to get admissions to graduate school. Some in academia are touchy about that.


All Reviewers Assigned : Nature Communications revised manuscript: What does it means? I have a revised manuscript which I submitted to Nature Communications. The status of the manuscript says 'Reviewers Assigned' for about 24 days. What does it mean? Is it under review by the reviewers? Or reviewers are not responding to the editor after the request to review the revised manuscript by the editor? Just want to clarify, that this question is specific to the editorial process of 'Nature Communications' which is not usual and not related to generalized peer review process. I think I am asking this question especially because Nature Journals have their own editorial workflow which is not as same a typical workflow of many journals.

It means reviewers have been invited, but you can't read anything more than that. Whether or not reviewers have accepted the invitation is usually confidential information available only to journal staff. Depending on the range of statuses the journal uses, this status might even mean that some reviews have been received.

In any case, there's nothing to do except wait and see.


How should I state my MS degree in my CV when it was in practice a joint-program? The title of my master degree certificate says that I obtained M.Sc. in "Control engineering", but half of the courses I took during my master belong to machine learning (computer science), and even my Master Thesis and my publication were related to machine learning.

But when I put in the top of my CV that I studied my MS in control engineering it brings a negative first impression!
I think the default assumption is that engineering disciplines are far away from computer science skills and programming.
So, I was wondering if I can use another title or a modification of that
title to properly send the message at the beginning?!

I would strongly recommend listing your degrees the same way they were awarded and (probably) printed on your diploma. You can add, of course, that your specialization was in the subfield of machine learning. This clearly separates the official title from your more specific description.

You wouldn't want someone who needed to check items on your CV to find that you are claiming something that you didn't "earn" and the university doesn't even "award".

This is true for nearly everyone, in fact. My degree is in Mathematics but my field was actually Real Analysis, so I can say PhD Mathematics (Real Analysis) honestly enough.


about academic proof-reading, what to do in this situation? I have submitted an article for a journal in the field of CS and it has been returned and suggested to pass thru a professional editor or proof-reading (this is because my mother language is not English). So far what I did was to pass my article to some online paid tools such as Grammarly and Paper Rater, checking the suggestions, lifted the corrections made by these programs (and being careful enough to check it first with some English grammar books). After that I sent the new version to a past Professor from my master studies and he returned me back the paper with some corrections (he is an English native speaker, but he told me that he was not a professional editor so maybe there could be some mistakes along the way). With all these changes I submitted again the paper, which by the way in the reviews that I got it was accepted by three reviewers, but one of them mentioned that the English needed more work. So I waited, and again it was rejected by the editor pointing me that still the English part needs to be corrected.

So what to do? I have found that there are some proof editing services online, but how to know if they are good? I have not seen the reviews of any of them and well the prices are not so cheap also (ranging from USD 350 to even USD 700). The services that I found were:

Enago, https://www.enago.com

Elsevier, https://webshop.elsevier.com/languageservices/languageediting/pages/howdoesitwork.html

American Journal Experts, https://secure.aje.com/en/prices

Wiley, https://secure.wileyeditingservices.com/en/prices/quote/new (this one its pricing form looks mysteriously the same as the AJS)

Any advice what to do in a situation like this? I would not like to submit to another journal because it passed quite a long time since this research started.

I don't have any advice about who to use, but I do suggest that you look to the long term. Try to find a person or a service that you will be able to work with on future papers, not just the current one. The person will get used to you and how you write and so the task will go quicker and maybe cheaper in the future.

Don't look for the cheapest service, I think. Your English skills will improve over time, but you will probably have a better experience if you can establish a relationship. You might even get writing tips from such an editor if you ask, after the person gets some familiarity with how you naturally write.


How do people get simultaneous offers? Several questions on this site relate to a situation where someone gets several offers simultaneously: for example, see How to choose between multiple math postdocs offers?.  But how does this situation arise?  In my (limited) experience, offers do not come simultaneously, and need to be replied to almost immediately (within a week or so).  For example, position A could have the application deadline 1 February, have interviews mid-February and announcements mid-March, while position B could have everything one month later.  To have two open offers at the same time seems very unlikely in a specialised field where positions are not open on a weekly basis.  Then how does this happen?

In mathematics, the answer is easy: most American math postdocs are selected on about the same schedule.  There are some variations of 4 to 6 weeks, but that still leaves plenty of room for second round offers from an early school to coincide with first round offers from schools that run later.

Further, there's been a tendency for schools that tend to compete over people to try to race each other to making offers, so the number of simultaneous offers ends up being higher than the number of schools would suggest.

(Also, a one week deadline to respond seems a bit short. What I've seen is more like two, with the ability to ask for an extra week or so which is usually granted if there's a chance of another offer.)

(Just for clarity, by most I mean more than half; there's a big early cluster and then additional positions being considered for months.)


Prof at small university or postdoc at big university Recently I've been faced with the dilemma of being an assistant professor in a small rural University near my home city or being a postdoc at the top University in my field in the world.....

What are the advantages or disadvantages of either choice?

As others remarked, this is highly individual. To make the answer easier, i'm going to assume that you don't have a strong personal preference and there are no factors that would 'make the decision for you', such as your partner working near one of those places.

Being a prof at a local university would likely mean a safe, stable position, so that you can focus on living your life. It might also be fun, if you can find motivated students or the curriculum offers something unique. On the downside, funding options might be very limited in such universities. You could end up in the vicious cycle where grant applications fail because you don't have enough research output, but you don't have research output because you have no money to fund a proper group. This of course depends if the position is a teaching or a research prof.

Smaller universities also sometimes attract people who, pardon my French, 'didn't make it'. If you're unlucky, being surrounded by such individuals can bring you down with them. You can imagine where that would go.

To be honest, i am facing a similar decision now, and am opting for the postdoc option. The reason is simple: freedom. Especially in a good university, you'll meet plenty of people that can steer you to a more advantageous situation, and the extra experience will only help. It also gives you the time to build a wider portfolio, and hence apply for better prof jobs. You will likely be less pressured to look for funding and have less administrative work, giving you the time to focus on your ideas, supervise students, build your own course and so on.

Two-three years from now, when you'll be finishing the postdoc, the local uni will perhaps still be available as an option. If you go for the prof position, switching jobs will be much more difficult. You do the math.


Is there a conflict of interest between me and the university if I get paid on teaching others how to apply for the PhD positions in my university? I am a Ph.D. student. An application agent company approached me and ask if I could be a casual consulter on their platform and give some advice to the students who want to apply for the Ph.D. position in my country. Usually, there will be only 5 or 6 hours of workload a month and they pay 5000 dollars a year. The work is about that I teach them how to apply, like what they should focus on, when to write the emails to the professors, how to write the emails to get the professor's attention, where to search the useful information about the opening PhD positions. And the agent also asked me whether I could write the personal statement or even upload the application materials for their students. I refused as I think this might be inappropriate. I am a PhD student who wants to do causal work and earn some extra money but not a real application agent. But consultation work seems to be fine. I also see some Ph.D. students from universities even like Oxford doing the paperwork writing. I guess they pay a lot if you do such kinds of work.

There are quite a lot of such companies. If you pay enough, they could deal with almost everything including paperwork writing, resume refinement, etc. for you during the application. I have already seen dozens of PhDs on their website. Some work on paperwork and some just work on consultation. Most of the PhDs’ major is English literature. I received a lot of emails from such companies. Usually I would ignore them except this one promised me that I could just do the consultation. Writing the personal statement for the others could be really annoying.

I think it is interesting as I could know some potential PhDs in my field and also I could get paid. But I just want to know if this involves some kind of conflict of interest as maybe I would help others apply for my own university in the future.

Three thoughts:

(1) It's hard to see how this is a conflict of interest if you have no role (even informally) in the admissions process.

(2) Writing an applicant's personal statement for them is unethical. If you are advising students on the best strategies for dealing with particular individuals in your department, that also seems a bit like "insider information."

(3) You should consider the (not so remote) possibility that your department will become aware of your role on this platform. If you are okay with this, then it is likely ethical. You may even want to consider discussing it proactively with a trusted professor (e.g., the graduate program director).


How to defend Masters thesis? I have to defend my thesis. I have implemented new technique but the results are same(as with the old technique). So how should I defend it? Is this necessary to get the better results or implementation of new technique matters in thesis?

It sounds as though your major contribution to expanding the extent of human knowledge is in showing how the new technique can be used to confirm results (X) which were obtained by the old technique. So when defending your thesis, you better be very sure that you show how this new technique enhances our understanding of X!!

If you are unsure how to best present this, talk to your advisor. In fact, even if you believe you know how best to present your contribution,  talk to your advisor! Take advantage of his/her experience and knowledge of the field to position yourself where your contribution can make the greatest possible impact.

You need to prove that you have expanded human knowledge, so focus on how this is better than the old technique, not on how you have gotten exactly the same results. Again, your advisor should best be able to show you how to do this.


Do any statistics program provide funding for masters students? I plan to be applying to graduate school next year in Statistics or Biostatistics and due to some financial constrictions, I will not be able to attend unless the tuition is waived at the the minimum. I am hesitant to commit to a 5 year PhD program for a funded education since I may run into some financial issues a few years in and may not be able to complete it. I know that most schools use their Masters program as a cash cow and thus are usually not funded. I was wondering if anyone here knew of any statistics programs that go against this and actually do fund their Master students?

Apply to PhD programs that can or will award a master's degree after you pass your qualifiers.

This way you have funding and you may find that the funding is enough to continue even if other financial constrictions happen. You don't know for sure that they will happen or that other circumstances may mitigate the problem.

It might also be possible to ask the department for a leave of absence (for a year or two).

In a worst case scenario, hopefully you can finish with a master's.


Very few research groups: continue doing PhD in this area? For a PhD in computer science or informatics, are there good reasons not to choose an area of research in which very few (3 or 4) known (small- to middle-sized) research groups work in the world?

are there good reasons not to choose an area of research in which very few people work worldwide?

There might be.

a research clique might be at work: sometimes, often unintentionally, you can observe a bunch of researchers starting to push some topic and ending up absorbed in their own little world proposing extensions of extensions of extensions and not noticing that they became irrelevant. Usually because something is wrong with the problem they work on. But sometimes such a niche might be actually very healthy, except the topic did not caught up more popularity in the relevant mainstream community.
something might be wrong with the problem they tackle: sometimes a group of absorbed (as above) researchers looses connection with reality and pushes towards solving a problem which does not exist anymore because somebody else solved it just by the way along a route to some other problem and everybody else recognized.
something might be wrong with the method the small group applies to the problem they tackle: sometimes the problem is good (see below), but the bunch tries to hopelessly push a method which simply does not yield anything. Often this is accompanied with use of a highly specialized terminology so that it is difficult to see that the method they use and the problem they tackle is in fact very much related to something else what yields more healthy research in the relevant mainstream community.

More generally, don't worry about the size of the field. What matters is whether the problem at the core of the niche is real and sound. Real means that solving it can have an impact on the society at large. You need to believe in your cause. For the sake of this blob, let sound mean that you see a solid way to articulate it and get a grip on it, most preferably including a method to measure progress. If you have the two, you are set even if the community tackling the problem is relatively small. All the rest is up to your capabilities and the difficulty level of the problem.

Trust your judgement.


What can I do about someone publishing my work from GitHub? I have many public repositories working on projects related to machine learning stuff, and it has recently come to my notice that someone has published a machine learning research paper based on one of the projects that I have in my GitHub with the same  results that would be obtained from running my code(without citing my GitHub, or taking prior permission).

I'm pretty upset. What can I do about it, from an academic route? And what could happen to the fraudster, if I do that?

The first question you need to ask is what license is your code under? If, for example, you published your code under the GPL, then someone taking your code and publishing results obtained with it is entirely within their rights. It may be bad academic style to not say where they got the code from, but there is nothing that would objectionable from a legal perspective about the fact. You might be upset that they didn't acknowledge you, but you likely have little recourse -- lots of people publish research done with widely used software packages like PyTorch without referencing where they had it from, and the academic community appears to be ok with that. (Whether that's how it should be is a separate question not to be litigated here.)

On the other hand, if you didn't attach a license to your code, then it remains yours whether or not the code is available on github. If you can prove that they used your code, then you could presumably take legal action against them, though that is a matter from which the journal in question will likely want to stay about as far away as possible. The difficult thing to show in this legal argument is that indeed the person in question did use your code, and not just their own implementation of a similar algorithm. If you have good reasons to believe that they did indeed use your code, then you will get a chance to test your belief during the discovery phase of any trial -- but you already get the idea: This is likely going to get expensive.

What would happen to that other person: If your pockets are deep enough to actually win a law suit, then that other person's employer is likely going to be interested in following up because their employee used a piece of software illegally. If your software was available under a license that allowed the other person to use it, then people can have differing opinions on whether or not they were required to cite you, and nothing will likely happen.

Short story short: If you really really don't want anyone to use your software, you have two options: (i) Use github, make your repositories public, mark everything as proprietary software, and set aside a few $10k for potential law suits; (ii) don't use github, or make your github repositories private.


How to find less-difficult-than famous unsolved problems? When I was in my high school I studied 14 undergraduate books with almost all their exercises. I am about to begin my undergraduate in mathematics this week. I love to do research in mathematics. I met a few professors during the last few months and asked them if they can accept me as their 'unofficial' research student but they all refused even if after I become officially an undergraduate student but without taking "research for undergraduates" course or I have be their graduate students.

Trying to do research on my own, I found a book that includes many unsolved problems. My question is that if I choose to do research like most students, that is adding knowledge to mathematics by expanding it gradually and in smaller steps, I can't because I don't have a adviser to know the frontiers and if I want to be an independent researcher I just know the problems that are famous to be impossible to solve!

How can I take a win-win with both; that is how to find 'smaller' unsolved problems like the problems students publish papers on, as an independent researcher when nobody willing to share them?

Also I found out that if learn mathematics along doing research I memorize the materials easily after analyzing them. That's a good side-effect of research compared to only studying.

Maybe the first thing to keep in mind is be patient.  Learning mathematics and finding good problems take time, and you're still very young.

In math, at the undergraduate level, the most important thing to becoming a good researcher is to learn a lot of math.  At this level, really the only reason to do research is for fun.  Your goal should not be to get new results--you might or you might not--but your goal should be to understand things and enjoy the process.

Thus my recommendation for doing research on your own is: just learn a bunch of things that seem interesting, and when questions naturally come to you, explore them.  You will probably stumble on to many ideas for research this way, and it doesn't matter if they have been studied/solved before or not (my experience: usually they have, but occasionally you find something new).

If you really want to do something new, it helps immensely to have an experienced mentor guiding you.  They can tell you what is known/what isn't, suggest relevant references and teach you some basic techniques.

It's unfortunate that none of your professors seem willing to work with you now, but there could be various reasons for that, such as being busy and not knowing your abilities/background.  I can't guarantee this, but there's a good chance that if you excel in their courses, one of them may be willing to provide you some informal guidance.

Finally, to directly answer the titular question here are some specific suggestions:

Try reading articles in undergraduate-oriented journals like The American Mathematical Monthly, College Mathematics Journal or Involve.  Many of the research articles are readable by undergraduates, and implicitly or explicitly suggest projects suitable for undergraduates.
You can use Mathematics Stack Exchange and MathOverflow to try find out what is known about a problem you're wondering about.  Also browsing some of the questions and answers will introduce you to some unsolved problems.
If you read an article you find really interesting, and you have some definite ideas about a project, you can try emailing one of the authors for their thoughts.
In the US, we have summer programs like REUs (Research Experience for Undergraduates) at various institutions.  You might look to see if there are any similar opportunities in our around your country.


Recent publication and special issues I'm looking to know how to get notifications when there is a recent publication (in IEEE Transaction Journal and MDPI Energies). Moreover, If there are any special issues (Smart grid or something related to it) I want to be aware of these. Can someone guide how to get notified with these two journals?

P.s: (Although I have accounts in these)

Thank you in advance.

To the best of my knowledge there is no way to get MDPI to notify you of upcoming special issues without knowing about everything else they publish.

If you're looking to submit to those special issues, I recommend looking for subject-specific communities (e.g. mailing lists or similar) that people might advertise calls for papers to.

If you're simply looking to read them, I suggest setting up some good Google Scholar alerts around the subjects; if you get these right then as well as giving you interesting articles from all over the place, they will tend to show up multiple articles from the same special issues.


Why do publishers still print a 'Half title' page? Isn't a Half Title redundant, when the Title page already states the full half Title?   See Wikipedia:

I know why books must have blank pages, but why not leave this page blank?

I instance The Happy lawyer. The front cover contains the full title The Happy Lawyer: Making a Good Life in the Law. Then the first Half title page states only 'The Happy Lawyer'. Just after p. xiii (The Foreword), but before p. 1, is another Half title pages that states only 'The Happy Lawyer'.

Another instance is Better Never to Have Been. The front cover contains the full title 'Better Never to Have Been: The Harm Of Coming Into Existence'. Then the Half title page states only 'BETTER NEVER TO HAVE BEEN'.

Why not?
It purely a stylistic choice.

Why bother having a title page at all when all the info is also on the cover/spine?

I think it is a nice stylistic choice since it gives an uncluttered first impression of the book


Impact of a W for grad school if I'm changing majors? I'm changing my major to philosophy from computer science in the middle of a semester, and I'm doing pretty poorly in one of my math classes. My advisor told me it would be a good idea to drop it since I'm changing my major. Would it have any impact in grad school admissions, especially if I want to go to a highly reputable school?

In general, no single thing like this would have much impact. In this case, I'd say even less. People aren't looking for small reasons to reject your application, but for evidence that you will be a success in your chosen field as well as in the program you apply to.

So, if you do well overall and do especially well in Philosophy then you should be fine. Good letters of recommendation will overcome a simple thing like a W.

But be prepared, if asked, to talk about why you wanted to switch. And make the reasons positive, about philosophy, not negative about math or CS.


When updating a preprint on arXiv, should I update my affiliation? I have a preprint on the arXiv, a couple of years old, and will shortly be re-submitting an updated version.  The changes are fairly limited — more than just typos, but not so much as to change the section numbering, let’s say.

I and a co-author are postdocs, and have moved institutions since the original version.  Should we update the author affiliations as given in the article, or leave them as they are?

The article hasn’t been published and probably won’t be any time soon (it’s expository, and a bit difficult to find a suitable venue for).  However, it’s been fairly widely read and cited as a preprint.

The field is pure mathematics.

Your affiliation as far as the work goes is where the work was done. You should perhaps add a footnote giving your current location, and (obviously) update any contact information given.

Or do it the the other way around: give current affiliation, and in acknowledgements or at least a footnote state where the work was done.

I've seen both.


What proportion of papers submitted to Nature are actually sent for review? From Nature's "Getting Published with Nature" guidelines:

  Nature has space to publish only 8% or so of the 200 papers submitted each week, hence its selection criteria are rigorous. Many submissions are declined without being sent for review.

This leads me to the question:

  Question: What proportion of the papers submitted to Nature actually get sent for review?

It'd be nice to know if, in general, the "biggest hurdle" in getting a paper published in Nature would be simply getting it to the reviewers.

Edited: I found a better answer to the question, the original indicative answer is left below.

Here, we have a statement from December 2006 regarding the number of submissions, rate of editor rejections and ultimate acceptance number. While slightly outdated, the acceptance rate of Nature journal does not seem to fluctuate widely between 2006 and 2012 (always around 7-8% of submitted articles), hence I believe the number is significant and valid:

  Nature receives approximately 10,000 papers every year and our editors reject about 60% of them without review. ... ... In the end we publish about 7% of our submissions.

From that we have, that in 2006 about 40% of submissions were sent out for peer-review.

The original indicative answer:
Not a precise answer, but can be indicative also for Nature journal itself: here is a statistics of a decade 2002-2012 of publishing in Nature Materials in numbers, various stats are presented. Specifically this graph shows that the ratio of peer-reviewed vs. submitted manuscripts is floating around 13%. Out of peer-reviewed, about 60% get accepted. This shows that their first filter, the editorial decision whether to review at all, is extremely aggressive and in fact is the filter in the publishing process.

According to a note here, Nature Neuroscience sends about 30-35% papers for peer-review.


Can I do a PhD without MSc? I am currently an undergraduate student in Turkey. I will graduate from genetics department and I would like to do a PhD without MSc in abroad. However my GPA sucks ( probably it will be 2.5 or 2.6 out of 4 ).

I have done my summer internships in Germany and America. I am very good in laboratory and I think I have got enough knowledge to do a PhD in genetics. My English level is upper-intermediate and I definitely have good references ( I have talked with 4 people, they are all Prof. and they all said that they would give very good references ).

But I am still concerned about my GPA. What do you think, can I be accepted to a PhD program?

Also, can I apply for both MSc and PhD or will they think that I am a fickle person and don't accept me for neither of them?

Some places in continental Europe can accept people with BSc but without MSc (but most - don't). In UK and US, MSc is a part of PhD, so typically you do don't need one to start.

But you ALWAYS need to consult a particular university/institute, as rules vary (and especially with treating foreign diplomas).

However, if your "GPA sucks" then, unless you have a strong research track (i.e. strong recommendation letters from your research internships, published papers) special exceptions may by unlikely.


Is it OK to inquire about paper status after 7 months (2nd round) review? I submitted a paper to an applied-mathematics journal in May 2015, and the first round review took a bit more than seven months. I only received one referee report (there would usually be two), which was generally positive. I submitted the revised draft in mid January 2016, and it is “under review” ever since.

I inquired about the status about four months ago and only got a reply from the journal staff, basically saying that my message has been forwarded to the handling editor (nothing from the handling editor though). I am wondering if it is OK to inquire again? How long should I wait before I make an inquiry on a paper status (without being too pesty).

The journal states that its target processing time from submission to final publication is eight to nine months, and it typically gives reviewers two months.

I inquired the status about 4 months ago and only got a reply from the journal staff, basically saying that my message has been forwarded to the handling editor ...

is telling me that the journal has not forgotten about your manuscript. They are still processing it.

As you are well aware of, reputable math/applied math journals turn around time are very long in general. I have read on this site that two years is not unheard of. Please see this answer for example.

If you are anxious to know the status of your manuscript, I think sending another inquiry is okay since last time you inquired about its status is four months ago. I don't think the inquiry is too pesty. They'll understand.


For non-English-speaking countries: Can I use my PhD to prove my knowledge of English for a UK visa? I was browsing through the needed documents for a skilled worker visa and I found that I need to prove my level of English as a requirement, but I've also found that I need a UK PhD certificate (I have to be accredited by NARIC).
In their [website][1], they have a service called PhD verification with English proficiency. This service means that I can use my PhD to prove my English level if it was "taught" in English at my home university, but I don't know what the word "taught" means exactly.
During my PhD, I wrote my dissertation in English. The articles were (obviously) in English, but the diploma is written in French. Can I still use that to prove my English proficiency? Perhaps, I should have a statement from my previous supervisors?
I come from a non-English-speaking country that uses French as a second language; So normally, I need an IELTS test. I need to know if I can follow the NARIC route instead of having to take the test...
[1]: https://www.ecctis.com/visasandnationality

I went through exactly the same thing (PhD in France, all publication and thesis in English, diploma in French, I come from a non-English speaking country and don't actually speak French, then applied for a postdoc position in the UK and needed prove my level of English for my immigration documentation).
So, the answer is yes you can, but it will (likely) be very very slow. The procedure is as follows: You send in your diploma (with a certified translation, you can get those for about 30 euros). Unless you finished your PhD at a super-famous French University (think Sorbonne), you go at the bottom of a very long pile. This is for "previously unknown Universities" (to NARIC), the ones they have to check in detail. When inquiring, I was told that this would take at least 3 months. Knowing how much some of the gvt admin ground to a stop during the pandemic, I wouldn't be surprised if it took a couple of months longer at this time.
Normally I would recommend going for IELTS test. Despite them being quite infrequent (I am told there used to be more dates some 8-10 years ago), I only had to wait about 2 and a half months to take the IELTS (compared to "maybe 3+" for NARIC approval). It is also quite neat that there is a "scientific track" for IELTS, so the writing assessment is focused on describing and reading out simple graphs, which helps if your vocabulary is science-centred.
However, these are not very normal times. Right now, you might feel more comfortable waiting 3+ months for the NARIC route instead of travelling to take a 2-day test with a group in a small classroom, even if the latter is quicker. As far as I remember, price-wise it was about the same expense (not sure if that included my travel to take the test or not).


Is there a special name for a contributed talk given longer time slot? A conference symposium I'm attending has all contributed talks, no invited or keynote talks.  But in each session, one of the [contributed] talks is given a longer time slot than all the others (40 mins vs 20 mins).  Is there a special name for these types of talks?  How would one denote this on their CV (and should they)?

This sounds like a fairly unusual format; I don't think there is a standard name for it that would be recognizable.

If you want to highlight your contribution you could always add some extra description of the content of some sort.

In this case the length of your talk might set it apart, as it implies a bigger contribution to the conference and shows you have experience in doing more than just the typical brief talk:

  "Sproingity Sproing", International Symposium on Blahdy Blah, March 2017. (40 minute oral presentation).


What social skills should I practice to make a successful doctoral application? I've been applying to doctoral positions in mathematics with a strong background. BSc and MSc in math, and a MSc in computational math/engineering. I've got research experience in my field and connected fields, a paper in preprint and more to come (with novel results), solid references, teaching experience, participated in international competitions representing my university/country, good grades. Still, most of the time I don't even get an interview. I definitely understand that there are people who are better than me, and I'm not mad about it. However, often when they publish who got the positions, and it can be someone who did their BSc over 6-7 years, or who had an adjacent degree (such as computer science or physics) but studied more mathematics, or who hasn't done any teaching or research otherwise.

A few professors I know have told me several times that it's not really fair, so what I have left are social skills. I just don't know what to say. I've had my CV, statement of purpose, application letters reviewed and they said it was really good.

How can I write an application that broadly speaking appeals to such a recruitment committee? What are some interesting forms of describing my ambitions? What catches the attention of a recruiter in terms of research ambitions? I have clearly stated my research topics, as well as why I want to do research in it and how, but I don't know how to spice it up.

Just to be clear, I'm in Europe, so I didn't drop out of any PhD program to get my master degrees. Also, most of the positions were open positions, so I just sent my application and then they will decide on what advisors should get new students.

EDIT 1: I'd like to clear out that I have a BSc and MSc in mathematics, and an additional MSc which is much more applied and incorporates a lot of physics and computer science. Thus, I do have the required courses to apply for a pure math position, which I even have checked up on on their websites.

It sounds more like an issue of relevance and application strategy rather than a lack of your part, such as social skills.

To answer the question as is, showing that you can balance independent/ individual work and being part of a group of people - not necessarily a research group but that you can network on your own, seek and offer advice and take initiative in communication - is a good approach. With the experience you mention, I believe you can find tangible examples on both aspects.

However, not getting interviews is a different issue. Both applying for a PhD and selecting a PhD student has a significant personal element. At the very least, both you and the potential supervisors must choose whether you want to work with each other for at least 3 years and produce something never done before. The supervisors may rely on past experience to make a decision. Also, it is not necessarily the objectively best candidate ("strongest") who will be accepted, but the fittest (with or without quotes) given the approach and culture of the department and the academics. Your background can be both an asset and a hindrance. A mixed or checkered background may be a better match in multidisciplinary or far-fetching projects, and may also reveal something about the person (e.g. adaptability, perserverence, wider experience etc). A "pure X" background provides obvious advantages in expertise, but might look narrow or irrelevant at first glance. That is why your research proposal is so important: it is where you demonstrate which fields you want to focus on and your research criterion and insticts. It is important to keep in mind that a very focused proposal may hit an obvious wall, no matter how well-written it is or how good the candidate: the supervisor may simply not be interested (regardless of area of expertise!) or think that this is the only thing you are interested in and will not consider his suggestions or a possible change of course. Flexibility is quite important, and often disregarded.

It is like fishing in murky waters and so situational that common patterns are difficult to spot. Based on what you write, I would advise you to examine critically if your past applications showed that you were a good match for the project. Did you show relevant skills? Did you identify the important points correctly (e.g. was there a hint of multidisciplinary work that you missed, or did your proposal come across as too narrow)? Did your cover letter and proposal highlighted your strengths with regards to the project? Did you judge the relevance of the supervisors' past research correctly? If you have contact with an academic that can advise you (personal tutor, friendly professor etc) it would be a good idea to discuss the research proposal and the current situation in the field (e.g. you might be "out of fashion", if everyone is currently running behind a certain bandwagon).


What are some criteria to get an Australian PhD scholarship? I want to apply for a PhD in Australia and I wrote a professor (who has an open position) with my CV. He was very positive in his mail and encouraged me to apply for that position. Now I want to know who is the decision-maker in taking a student and offering funds? I mean is it like the professor asks people to apply but the ultimate decision-maker is the university itself? Or the professor can take anyone if he wants to. What is most likely to be in Australia?
Also, is it true the scholarship committee focuses solely on GPA, rather than research work? I mean is it possible if the GPA is not high but research experience and works are excellent?

For Australia, both the supervisor and the university might reject a PhD student.  Universities may often reject PhD students for inadequate language ability even if the supervisor wants the student.  These decisions are based on a threshold, not based on who else applies.
Some supervisors have funding they can use to pay PhD students at their discretion, but most PhD students are funded through a university program.  The fact that a position has been advertised does not mean the supervisor necessarily has funding for that position.  For funding by a university, research experience is essential.  Marks (not called GPA in Australia) are also considered.  There is a fixed amount of funding available, so decisions depend on who else applies.