Benefit in listing major rejections in one's CV? I ran across an assistant professor's CV which had a category that outlined major rejections. The category listed items like how many times they were rejected from graduate programs, the most times a manuscript got rejected prior to being published, how many times they failed to secure a research grant, etc. I have never seen any other scholar's CV that had such a category.

I personally thought that this was refreshing to see where one was humble enough to outline their major failures in light of their impressive accomplishments, especially considering how the academic sphere can be rather... ego-inflated.

Is there a benefit to doing so, or would it be construed as something problematic? Or would it largely depend on where someone is in their career (e.g., Grad Student vs. Tenure-Track Assistant Professor vs. Tenured Full Professor vs. Distinguished Professor, etc.)?

It's somewhat similar to this question, but also unique in that it's not as specific as listing which conferences or papers got rejected--it's just a numeric category that says something like "Rejected from 3 Grad Programs" rather than "Rejected from Harvard, Yale, Princeton".

I don't see any particular benefit from doing so, but I know a number of faculty who are taking a sort of principled stand toward showing that, in a lot of cases, academia is just persistently slogging through failure.

There may be some slight benefit in showing productivity that doesn't result in a clear output ("I submitted X R01 proposals, they just didn't get funded...") but I think primarily this is a personal stance and at best will cause someone to nod in sympathy.

I've also seen this talked about a lot in the somewhat more ephemeral and less formal spaces of social media.


Where might I find a collection of before and after proofread articles? Completely unrelated to my field (I do not work in languages) but I have written a small piece of software that proof reads my work for grammar and syntax. I'm interested in finding a few documents (ideally from a range of academic disciplines) that I can use to check my proof reading software.

If you perform a search for "examples of bad student papers" or "examples of bad writing" you should find many examples. As an added bonus, many of the examples are then analyzed to provide suggestions for improvements.


Popularity of Editorial Express Why do many journals and conference organizers use Editorial Express and the related Conference Maker (https://www.editorialexpress.com/)? The tools look like a relic from the 90s. And at least the manuscript submission tool contains a few bugs.
Is it a competitive pricing, an integration with related software, or potential disruptions associated with migrating to alternative platforms?
This question is not meant as a critique or an attack on the Editorial Express brand. I am just surprised whenever I use that tool.

It seems that 77 journals use Editorial Express. Given that there are tens of thousands of scholarly journals, it does not seem to be immensely popular.
Anyway, one Editorial justifies the adoption of Editorial Express. It might answer parts of your question:

We have decided to use Editorial Express, developed by Professor John Rust at the University of Maryland. This software is very cost effective, and allows for much flexibility in how it is used. The software will send automatic reminders to reviewers, automatically save contact information provided by authors and reviewers, save all correspondence and manuscripts, and has many reporting functions. Editorial Express is Web-based, which allows the editors to use the software at any time, in any place. Ideally, this Web-based solution will allow us to coordinate the duties of John Mallinckrodt and myself, and might provide for some significant financial savings.

To examine the argument about cost-effectiveness further: The standard price of Editorial Express is $2000 per year, but can even be lower due to its "lowest price guarantee"-scheme. In comparison, one of its competitors, Manuscript Manager, has a graded pricing that may cost up to $8500 per year. Another one, ScholasticaHQ, offers a "peer review system" that costs $250 per year in addition to $10 per submitted manuscript (thus, if you have 200 submissions per year, it adds up to $2250).


Do superficially encouraging statements within rejection letters for faculty job applications mean anything? Over the past few years, I have written a lot of job applications for permanent academic positions. None of these have been successful. I have been interviewed a few times, but mostly I have received either no reply or a very standard rejection letter.
A handful of the rejection letters contain some kind of statement seeming to imply that although they don't want to interview me, the committee did like my application to some extent. For example, here's a sentence from one such letter I recently received (emphasis mine):

We received many excellent applications and although the search committee was impressed with your credentials, we have decided your application will not be advanced for further consideration at this time.

My question is: does this statement, and other ones like it, mean anything or is it just a bit of fluff inserted for politeness?
To put it in another way: should I infer from this that the committee actually was impressed with my credentials and that they sent this reply to only a subset of candidates they rejected? Or is this likely to just be part of a totally generic rejection letter and I should therefore infer nothing?

It could be both an honest statement or generic fluff. Unfortunately, there's no way for you to distinguish both, and to derive useful information here. (Maybe unless they comment on specific things they found impressive, but that doesn't seem to be the case.)
The more informative fact are the rejections themselves. A single rejection means hardly anything, but if you only received rejections, there would be some problem that you need to fix. The fact that you got some invitations is indeed a good sign.


How to deal with a student who most likely has a mental condition, and keeps arguing with me in class? I am a TA for an introductory computer programming course at a university in the US. There is one student in particular who, during lecture, will argue with me about every point I make, which eats up a lot of lecture time and becomes un-enlightening for the students, as I am mainly repeating myself to answer the question/respond to the argument.

The student doesn't have previous knowledge in the programming language, so I don't think he's some conceited maniac trying to prove that he's better than me. Simply put, I think the best inference is that he has a sort of mental condition.

For instance, if I show an example on the board, he might blurt out that it's wrong, and try to explain why. While I appreciate students double-checking me, almost 100% of the time, the examples and points that I make are not incorrect, and after explaining it, he becomes quiet for a little bit to process what I said, and tries to point out another flaw. Essentially, he would try to challenge me if I said "1 + 1 = 2", if he could.

These debacles can go on sometimes for up to two minutes before I have a chance to move on. Very frequently, he asks questions/challenges me on things that I just explained or went over, so the class doesn't benefit from this, and it's generally a non-productive use of time. Often times, I will say something like, "If you'd like to discuss this more, we can during office hours," which is a statement that he seems to ignore completely, and will continue his questioning even after I've said this.

Additionally, when I am helping individual students in the classroom during work time, he will shout out to me from across the room to tell me something or ask me a question, and when I say "I can help you shortly when I'm done with Sally here," he will sometimes leave his seat and approach me directly, interrupting my conversation with the student.

How do I deal with a student like this? It seems like he has a mental condition of some sort, based on his interactions and mannerisms, though I've never received a notice from the university's disabilities department. The reason why I bring up the possibility of a mental condition is because he is set off very easily, so I'd like to handle the situation as delicately as possible.

I have responsibility for students with alternate needs within a Computer Science department and thus have professional experience of the situation you describe. It is not uncommon in our subject.

Our experience is that computing attracts a higher proportion of students on the Autistic Spectrum than do other disciplines. We are operating with about (my personal guess) 2-3% (of total cohort) diagnosed and perhaps double that number undiagnosed.

Some of these students are often not aware of the rest of the class being present and treat teaching as a personal one-to-one dialogue with the teacher. They act as they would sitting with you across a desk. Sometimes it is more extreme and the social norms and boundaries of even working one-to-one are not clear to them. Although, as a spectrum condition, each person may be different, it is common that they wish to understand every point of minutiae before they can build the big picture understanding; becoming detailed obsessed is often a common trait. This leads to question after question as a form of quest.

You should seek advice from a more experienced professional in your institution. It is likely that the student's condition is known, but details are often considered confidential and perhaps not shared with you, because that is what the student may wish. The student may be receiving support elsewhere, perhaps in the form of mentoring. If that is the case then the mentor may be able to assist in explaining the social situation to the student and also give you guidance on how to reply.

Sometimes such students are not diagnosed with any specific condition and are not receiving support as it has never been needed. They are likely to have achieved high grades in earlier studies and the good results have propelled them through to your class.

For a student who is unaware that their behaviour is different from others in their class it is more difficult to handle. I ask such a student to speak to me in a one-to-one appointment in my office. I do not assume that they have any named condition, as this is not really relevant. I just talk to them to explain how lectures work, clarify my role and how I can answer questions. I often have to explain, sometimes in great detail, what makes a good verbal question in class, what makes a good verbal question, what makes a good written question for email, what makes a good question for the class VLE, what makes a good question for StackExchange and so on. It is often the case that no one has ever explained how information is obtained. It does take a degree of tact and experience to do this, which is why I suggested seeking more experienced advice.

Remember, some of the achievements in our subject have been made by people who others found difficult to work with. Look at the movie "The Imitation Game" and you can clearly see (in a fictionalised portrayal) Alan Turing is shown displaying tendencies similar to those you describe. I'm sure if you had a current student with similar attributes you would have been pleased to have had the opportunity to have someone so similarly gifted in your class.


Exactly How Important Is The Quality Of My Degree (Grades, GPA)? I don't want to bore anyone so long story, very, very short:

This is for the Computer Science / Software Engineering industry.
I am combating laziness and extreme procrastination due to depression.
Not doing very well in my studies as a result.

Based on the two above I wonder if a degree with some tainting in the first year of my units would still be enough to get me a good job (in the industry).

Is experience worth more than my grades alone?

I say this because I often find that I do better by doing than just by reading the course material for Discrete Structures or Databases etc....

Should I not worry about my (past) bad grades and make the best of the situation and just develop a good portfolio?

I want to fix what I have gotten myself into, and I hope someone in the industry or with some kind of related experience can give me some insight.

Of course, it's no problem to tell people "Hey, I was lazy in school but I'll work super-hard for you." Unfortunately, people won't buy it.

From my time in the software industry, hiring quite a few people, I would actually not normally even look at their grades, unless they were borderline in the interview. Even then, if there was another candidate who was better in the interview, that borderline candidate would not even get a callback.

Some people will care about grades but for computer science 'guys' I find that what most people in industry really care about is what you can do for them. Can you help them more than someone else can help them? If so, then you'll likely land a job.

If you shape up, pull out of your 'funk' and get down to actually learning, you will likely be OK. If you let depression pull you under water, you'll drown.

You've started your degree, you should finish it. However, don't let the past dictate your future. This is the first day of the rest of your life. It's always darkest before the dawn. I'm sure there are more sayings along this line but in the end, depending your area of IT, you can do fine even if you had a bad start to school. If you have a strong finish, it's easy to explain that you should be judged on your 'exit velocity' rather than the start.


Publishing in Mathematics and Computer Science related journals I have seen Elsevier journals offer Gold open access and Green open access options, when I was checking for journals related to Mathematics and Computer Science.
I have understood that Gold open access can be gained by making a publication fee. However they have mentioned that waivers are offered for countries eligible for Research4Life program.
Can someone help me to understand whether you have to be a part of some program to have this waiver? i.e. if you are in a country mentioned in the Research4Life program page in Elsevier, do you get free publication open access in Gold open access journals?
https://www.elsevier.com/about/corporate-responsibility/research4life
And do Elsevier and Springer offer reductions or discounts in Article Processing Charges for low income countries?
Can someone please advise if you are aware of this.
Thanks a lot in advance.

The rules for Elsevier are stated on this page.  Essentially, as long as all authors of your paper work at institutions in countries in "Group A" then you get a full waiver.  If any author's affiliation is outside this set of countries, you don't (there is also a set of countries that get a 50% waiver).
It's unclear whether you can get a waiver if you don't have any institutional affiliation.  I suspect it may be difficult, since Elsevier is huge and the system is supposed to work automatically by detecting your country of affiliation.  If they don't even respond to an email to support, I wouldn't be optimistic.


Is listing annexed territory listed in author details a valid reason to decline to review? I recently accepted a paper review based on an abstract.

On seeing the paper, at least one of the authors has listed their address as being within an unrecognized annexed territory, like this:

  Author, X university, /annexed territory/, /annexing state/

I am interested in the community views on whether this is reason to decline the  review. And, if so, should the reason be declared.

At the moment, I intend to decline as I do not wish to legitimize the annexation in any way. On the other hand, I also do not wish to discriminate against individual researchers.

How much should the decision depend on:

the perceived quality of work?
personal links?
time since/extent of violence during annexation?

Can anyone offer a good framework for thinking about this?

Points of clarification:

The authors do not use the term "annex", "annexed", or "annexing".
It is widely considered an illegitimate annexation (shared with a
majority of world states, UN)
The annexing state is not required for geographical location/postal
address (if anything makes it more confusing).
I do not wish to act in a way that can be perceived as "activism", or to
"create a stink"...
My argument is that adding to the record with the annexing state included
helps (albeit in a very minor way) its potential path to legitimacy.
Please do rebut...

"Annexing" might not be the correct term in this case, perhaps "occupying" is more accurate, I'm not sure - I think the general point of the question stands either way...

It might be helpful to reference what policies journals typically have on this?

Since you ask for a framework for thinking about it, I'll suggest that an action on your part that disadvantages the author, perhaps already a victim, won't bring justice. Probably better to ignore that detail and focus on what the author says, and honestly give the usual feedback.

If you want to try to deal with the unfairness of the annexation, there are other places that would be more appropriate and effective.

But your review is independent of any concept of "legitimization". You are giving a service to an author and a journal, not the occupying country.


Choosing the title of a paper: are provocative titles better? I am currently working on a paper that challenges some long-standing practices within my field, but am questioning how to title the paper. Basically, the old view in the research field is "we do Y instead of better method X, because X takes too long." We show that X is usually just as fast as Y, and often is actually faster.

Given the fact that we're taking what could be a "controversial" stance, does it make sense to put the controversial idea directly in the title, or should it be saved for the abstract.

Basically, the question is if a "traditional" title, such as:

  Using New Method X to Improve Solving Problem Y

is preferable to directly mentioning the issue in the title:

  Using New Method X Makes Assumption Z Obsolete.

Or is finding a title that suggests superiority without questioning relevance a satisfactory compromise?

It might be viewed as incivil to refer to someone else's work as "obsolete", whether or not one could defend such a claim. An editor or referee might object to the title, too, and, perhaps even be subliminally biased against your result because of a too-aggressive title.

That is, "provocative" in the sense of more-vividly-descriptive, without too-direct negativism about prior work, might be a very good thing. But I think if "provocative" too much means "antagonistic", the net would be counterproductive and regrettable.

Asserting that you've made progress is already a bit aggressive, suggesting, as is inevitable, that previous work is being superceded (even if still relevant as some sort of historical/dialectic record). My own taste is that winners can afford to be generous.

Edit: in light of edits to the question... I'd still encourage a sort of "innocent" -seeming, or almost-apologetic seeming, self-description. My point would be that people who understand the situation will see the implications of even a very-modest statement. Descriptiveness is good, yes, but perhaps not "judgemental" phrases.


Joining ArXiv without university affiliation I no longer have a university affiliation and in particular no longer have access to a unviersity email account. I've have had two papers recently accepted for publication in closed access journals (published by Elsevier and Springer). My university affiliation appears on the papers
because that is where the research was done at the time. I would like to upload the preprints to ArXiv. Both the journals and my co-author are happy with this. There are dire warning on ArXiv of claiming university affiliation when this is not the case (eg. lifetime ban).

My question is how do I join up? Is it even possible for me to do (the previous questions below suggests that it may possible)? Ideally I would like my previous affiliation to show up on the site in some way even if it is marked as 'formerly at university X'.

Note: my co-author could join ArXiv but he doesn't want to (a combination of being retired and not liking technology) and I respect his reasons.

Previous questions  on Academia.Stackchange that are relevant but that are somewhat different from the present situation:

Can you submit to Arxiv without an institutional affiliation?

Is there something I need to do on arxiv if I lose academic affiliation

Let's distinguish two senses of "affiliation" for arXiv:

The affiliation listed in your arXiv account profile.  The arXiv policies say:

  It is a violation of our policies to misrepresent your identity or organizational affiliation. Claimed affiliation should be current in the conventional sense: e.g., physical presence, funding, e-mail address, etc. Misrepresentation of identity or affiliation, for any reason, is possible grounds for immediate and permanent suspension.

So you cannot list your former university as an affiliation in your profile, much as you might wish to, because it is not your current affiliation.  You can list a current employer if you have one and if your employer says it's okay, otherwise you can enter "None" or "Independent" or "Private" or anything else to that effect (or maybe even leave it blank, not sure if that's possible).

Anyway, as GoodDeeds mentioned, it does not appear that your profile affiliation is listed publicly anywhere.
The affiliations listed within the articles you submit to arXiv.  These should, as usual, reflect your affiliation at the time that the work was done.  It is perfectly fine if that is different from your current affiliation as it appears on your arXiv account; this is not misrepresentation in any way, and there is no reason for it to incur a ban or any other negative consequences.  People change affiliations all the time, and there is nothing wrong with submitting an article that you wrote some time ago when your affiliation was different.

In the unlikely event you're questioned about it, you can just explain: "When I wrote the paper I was affiliated with University X; now I am not."  In the even unlikelier event that you're asked to provide verification of this, presumably it won't be hard to do so.

So to summarize: Yes, you can create an arXiv account, but don't use your former university as your affiliation in your profile.  You may need endorsement in order to submit papers; we have several other questions about this process on the site.  You can list your previous affiliation on the title page of those papers as you normally would.


Biological data being used by an unpublished research paper is considered proprietary This question may be too specialist to be on topic here. If it is off topic, please feel free to transfer it to another SE site, or close it, as
appropriate.
I am planning to publish an applied statistics paper. This paper
develops an algorithm and then applies this algorithm to some data. I
obtained most of this data from the site http://www.imgt.org. The data I am
using are immunoglobulin and T cell receptor nucleotide sequences, in
the form of FASTA files. I'm using around 200 of these.
Here is an random example of the data I am using (click on [6 Sequence (FASTA format)] to get the FASTA file).
Now, I have a problem. In Warranty Disclaimer and Copyright Notice, is written

The IMGT® software and data are provided as a service to the
scientific community to be used only for research and educational
purposes. Individuals may print or save portions of IMGT® for their
own personal use. Any other use of IMGT® material need prior written
permission of the IMGT director and of the legal institutions (CNRS
and Université Montpellier 2).

I just heard from Prof. Marie-Paule Lefranc and she replied:

I have no objection that the data you retrieved for your work from
IMGT/LIGM-DB be made available to the reviewers, but unfortunately we
cannot authorize a script or a distribution of the IMGT/LIGM-DB files
with your code to the users.
You can provide the users with the list of the IMGT/LIGM-DB accession
numbers you used, with the source of the data clearly identified:
(IMGT/LIGM-DB version number) and reference to NAR 2006.

Well, this just made my life more difficult. To start with, I'm
puzzled by this. Isn't biological data like this public domain? Is it
really possible to treat immunoglobulin and T cell receptor nucleotide
sequence data as proprietary information?
I just wrote back and asked Prof. Lefranc what license the data was
published under, which I had not done earlier.
Additionally, how does one make data available to reviewers and not to
users? That is awkward, to say the least.
Also, the data is inconvenient to download. As you can see
from the example above, the FASTA file is displayed in a web page, and
is not downloaded by that button. One needs to clean the web page to
get the FASTA file, which is a pain. As you can see Prof. Lefranc also
disallowed the use of a script for doing this. What this most likely
means in practice is that no user will ever actually test the code,
because obtaining the data is too difficult.
I realise that the users of this site may not be comfortable offering
what is essentially a legal opinion, and if so, can anyone suggest a
more authoritative source to ask about the legalities of this? Thanks.

The copyright is probably on the full database release flatfile and the formatted entries ... you will find similar conditions for UniProt/SwissProt so it is not so unusual.

The restrictions on scripts are common to prevent server performance hits from a large number of requests.

You can simply invite reviewers to download the data from some other server, for example from the EBI SRS server. The URL for entry A00673 would be

"http://srs.ebi.ac.uk/srsbin/cgi-bin/wgetz?[IMGTLIGM-ID:a00673]+-view+FastaSeqs+-ascii"

You can also use a list of accessions, for example A00673 or A01650

"http://srs.ebi.ac.uk/srsbin/cgi-bin/wgetz?[IMGTLIGM-ID:a00673|a01650]+-view+FastaSeqs+-ascii"

If downloading many entries you should pause between requests, but putting lists into the URLs may reduce it to few enough not to cause a problem. I doubts EBI would be upset by 200 requests - they would be concerned about thousands.

There are various fasta formats available for IMGT data, you need to find a server that produces fasta files compatible with your input requirements.

Alternatively of course your reviewers could download the whole database from IMGT or any of the other servers (including ftp://ftp.ebi.ac.uk/pub/databases/imgt/) and generate their own fasta subset from the list of accessions/ids

Hope that helps!


Why do universities require international students to show language proficiency? For example, Let's say an American person wants to attend a French university F. F explicitly states that French is the main language of instruction. Why would they require the student to take a language proficiency test for admission? Any prospective student should be aware that he or she has to know French in order to follow the lectures or when taking oral/written exams. Why don't they simply trust the student? And when he or she thinks to attend even without knowing one single French word, then it's his or her own fault. (And it doesn't even matter if it is undergraduate or graduate school)

There are 4 spoken languages in Switzerland (mainly German, French and Italian) and all Swiss students can take an exchange semester at another Swiss university. Swiss universities don't require for example a French-speaking person to show German language proficiency, if he or she wants to attend a German-speaking university. They explicitly state that it's in a student's own responsibility to know German (in this case)

The short answer is that when people want something, they often experience cognitive distortions that prevents entirely accurate assessments. Dunning-Kruger is a good example of one of these effects, where a student thinks, "Oh, I'd love to study in Paris - and lots of people speak French, so I'm sure I could pick it up!" Learning a new language to a college-level of proficiency in reading, writing, and speaking is incredibly challenging, yet some people inevitably misjudge this.

Sure, the student would eventually figure this out and face the consequences, but in the mean time there are lots of reasons the institution wants no part in such a situation. For one, it's sad - a student will struggle, feel isolated, and most people end up blaming others for their situation and don't take complete responsibility ("why did they let me in if they knew it wouldn't work?!"), so it can be really unpleasant. I saw a student from China try to make it in English-only classes, and I couldn't make out if he even understood more than a few words in English - he only ever nodded, looked confused, and looked back down at his paper. It was just sad to see, and I can't imagine how this was helpful to him - the only way he could succeed was to have an interpreter (he didn't have one), or cheat, and that's just a terrible situation to be in.

Most institutions also have various statistics like drop-out and graduation rates, as compiled by an office like Institutional Research, often reported to the government (for "public" institutions, and others who take government money). Institutions have a lot to lose for regularly taking on students they have a very good reason to think will fail in their program, or will require disproportionately high resources to support. So they want to try to avoid such situations, when possible. Finally, positions in a class/program/institution are often limited, and accepting one student can mean necessarily rejecting some other student, which makes administrators even more keen to be careful of offering a spot to a student unlikely to succeed.


How do I get "promoted" as a PC member in a conference? Recently I served as a Program Committee member (=reviewer) in several conferences in computer science. In these conferences, there is a "hierarchy" of reviewers: there are "PC members", "senior PC members", "area chairs", and the "PC chair".

Do I need to do anything in order to "advance" in this hierarchy?  Or should I just wait until some PC chair in the future decides to "promote" me?

I am not sure if this is the same in your field, but in mine (software systems) PC member and senior PC member are actually different roles with different tasks. It's not so much an honour badge to be a senior PC member than being assigned for a different job in the selection process (typically, PC members do most of the reviewing while senior members do less reviewing and more "meta-reviewing", similar to an Associate Editor for a journal). It's also not the case that, once "promoted", you will always remain in that role - every team of program chairs is free to assemble their own PC, and they invite people to the different roles. This often, but not always, includes re-inviting previous committee members.

I know of cases where people who used to be senior PC members were asked to serve as regular PC members in the following year (or not at all). Also, many senior PC members are actually more junior (in terms of academic age or rank) than some of the regular PC members. This has to do with PC composition - you want to have good coverage of all topical areas that you receive contributions in, and of course past performance and the subjective impression (of the PC chairs) of the different people plays a big role as well.

That is all to say that there typically is no defined promotion process between different levels in a program committee. You need to do good work in previous years and gain sufficient notoriety in the community that the next batch of PC chairs sees you as somebody who they trust to oversee the selection of papers in a specific niche topical area.


How bad is it to put the wrong details in a cover letter? When applying for academic jobs, it is common to apply to multiple positions and use essentially the same cover letter for all the applications. The danger is that you might forget to change some of the details from one cover letter to the next. I realized that I have done this recently. How bad is it? Specifically, I applied to a call in area X by saying I'm applying to area Y. (Thankfully, I got the name of the university right. And X and Y are not very different.)

Perhaps someone who has experience on hiring committees can tell me how much of a detriment it is to an application to have the wrong details in a cover letter. I assume this is a reasonably common mistake that is largely overlooked, but it gives the wrong first impression.

Sometimes mistakes like this happen. Also, faculty search committees recognize that candidates are applying for multiple positions at one time, so it wouldn't necessarily send up red flags. Most candidates will use a template for their cover letter and change things around. I've chaired search committees and will say that having the university name correct, but the area (you mention it is related) incorrect would not be a fatal flaw for a candidate. However, I might be extra careful at looking at his or her other content/materials for fit and would be more likely to view any additional typos or mistakes as basic sloppiness.

However, it also depends on how competitive that specific position may be. If there are a number of stellar candidates and one made the mistake, it would be easier to rule that person out to make decision making easier. I do not suggest contacting the faculty search chair or members. It will only emphasize that you made the mistake.

Maybe to boost your hopes...I searched for my first faculty position during the recession and applied to 120 positions over a two-year period (many schools lost funding for positions after they were posted, so it was advised to apply for EVERYTHING). One school called me for a campus visit and I was excited. To prepare, I reviewed the cover letter I sent them...only to realize that I wrote the wrong university on the cover letter! With 120 applications, I gave myself some grace for the error. However, it didn't stop me from getting interviewed for the job - the rest of my application made up for the error. Good luck!


Industry certifications as program entrance requirements? I've noticed several academic programs that require, or accept in lieu of more traditional entrance evaluations, industry credentials for admissions.

Is there a comparative analysis of programs that allow industry licensing/certification versus those that adhere to more traditional entrance requirements like the GRE?

The specific credential that I'm thinking of is the CISSP (1).  This certification has been eligible for transfer credit equivalency for some time (2), but I've only recently seen the certification as an admissions requirement (3) for an academic program.

Some data points that I would would be interested in are:

How do examinations, such as GSE/CISSP/CISM/etc, compare to the GRE in terms of overall academic preparedness?
Is there is measurable difference in the comparative difficulty between the different categories of examinations?
If you've taken both types of examination, industry and academic, is one class of examination better or worse for gauging candidates, and why?

Refs:

The Certified Information Systems Security Professional (CISSP) is an industry standard credential and certification.
For example: American Public University System (private, for-profit) and Walsh College, MI (private, non-profit)
Capitol College, just one of several examples.

Is there a comparative analysis of programs that allow industry
licensing/certification versus those that adhere to more traditional
entrance requirements like the GRE?

I am not aware of a formal analysis of the differences. One could probably divide graduate programs into two camps, with some gray area between. In a really general sense, academic research doesn't prepare you for industry jobs and industry jobs do not prepare you for research. Therefore, the two type of graduate programs are research targeted and industry targeted. I would argue that any program that accepts/requires/weights industry certifications falls into the industry targeted camp. The two camps are so different that trying to compare across them is silly.
As to your other questions

How do examinations, such as GSE/CISSP/CISM/etc, compare to the GRE in
terms of overall academic preparedness?
Is there is measurable difference in the comparative difficulty
between the different categories of examinations?
If you've taken both types of examination, industry and academic, is
one class of examination better or worse for gauging candidates, and
why?

Standardized tests in general are pretty rubbish metrics and that is why most admission committees also request transcripts, essays and recommendations. The GRE is likely marginally better at predicting success in research targeted programs and the industry exams will be marginally better at predicting success in industry targeted programs. As for difficulty, it really depends on the experience of the individual. Is an History exam more or less difficult than a Math exam?
Yes, but it depends on the individual. Individuals with an industry background will likely find the industry tests easier than the GRE, while those following a research based academic career path will likely find the GRE easier than the industry exams.


When submitting a CV as part of my graduate school application, should I include hyperlinks? I am currently in the process of applying to different PhD programs. As part of my application, I am required to upload a CV. On my CV, I have included hyperlinks to my GitHub home page, my Google Scholar page, and to other GitHub projects that I have worked on. More precisely, my CV was written in LaTeX and uses the hyperref package to create these hyperlinks. I submit these CV's in PDF format with the hyperlinks embedded in them.
Once I upload my CV and preview it, for some universities, the hyperlinks work fine after I upload my CV and preview it. However, for others, the preview seems to remove the hyperlinks from the CV. I use sentences like "see here for details." in my CV, where here is hyperlinked, so removing the hyperlink makes this sentence meaningless. Note that different universities have different methods of previewing the CV, such as opening the CV in the Adobe PDF viewer or in a non-Adobe PDF viewer in another window. Hyperlinks usually work if the CV is opened using the Adobe PDF viewer.
Are people on the graduate admissions committee able to see these hyperlinks and download my CV in PDF format regardless of what the preview looks like?

The issues you point to are real and good to pay attention to, but links are too useful to simply not use them in situations like this. Here is how I approach this issue:

Definitely use links (unless there is an explicit prohibition or a guideline discouraging their use), where appropriate. They add a lot and can be very useful to showcase your work and projects (and general tech savvy and resourcefulness).

Don’t use the “click here for blabla” format for links in a PDF document. This would be confusing to someone reading the document on paper or on a PDF from which the link has been stripped. Instead the link text should be equal to the URL it links to (although it’s okay, and may be preferable, to strip the “https://“ header). Example: “see academia. stackexchange.com for blabla”.

In general, don’t assume that any reader can or will visit the link. The document must stand on its own and make sense even if the links end up being stripped out. So, consider the links as extras that can add useful context but don’t use them to communicate any critically important information.

Link text should be styled (color, underlining, monospace font etc) so it’s easily seen and understood as a link.

Don’t point to web pages with very long URLs that clutter up the page and will lead to visually jarring line breaks (which LaTeX’s hyperref package doesn’t handle well). If the URL is somewhat long but not too long, consider putting it in a footnote and shrinking the font size.

Don’t use URL shorteners to get around the issue of long URLs. They obfuscate the link destination and require the reader to visit the link to find out where it points to, which is an annoyance and a security issue.


Is getting back to normal life difficult after PhD? As a PhD student, during the four years of research, you are your own boss. PhD students are not restricted to specific working hours (or place) – as long as they do the work it doesn’t matter when, how, or where they do it.
I spend most of my time working at home or in coffee shops instead of my desk in uni, and I take a day off after long meetings...
I find that this freedom is what enabled me to be creative, come up with new ideas, start collaborations with others in my group, and publish papers.

Now that I am almost done with my PhD, I am worried about life after PhD.
I am wondering if it would be difficult to get back to a normal job working a set amount of hours every day, in the same place.
Is that why most people stay in academia after getting a PhD?

To answer your question, we have to clarify some misconceptions it seems to carry. First, a fixed routine is a staple in most jobs you'll come across. You're going to have to accept this. Even at Google, employees are given the freedom to take time off anytime they want -- but this time has limits, and it's on the promise that they'll return to work for a chunk of hours. The vast majority of jobs, no matter how flexible, will not be lax enough to let you work at a coffee shop in the long run.

The same goes for academia. As a professor or academic, you'll be required to teach, do some forms of public service, and, of course, do research. A lot of things from the first two will be fixed beyond your control in terms of task variation and scheduling. As for the rest, there's some freedom to allot time to tasks as you see fit, but given the amount of work you'll have to do, it will come to be structured in some way or another.

Second, it's more accurate to say that a lot of people aren't staying in academia after their PhD. The market today is vastly different than it was twenty years ago. Academic jobs are harder to come by, and tenured positions are an endangered species. Most people will find themselves working as adjuncts or lecturers for a large chunk of their careers. And so PhD grads are now more commonly seeking employment outside academia -- industry, governments, NGOs, etc.

Third, most importantly, no one chooses or should choose a job because of a free schedule. That's far too limiting. Choose a job whose tasks click with your interests, something that motivates you to work. Consider the reverse for your own background: if you hated research, I'm sure that no matter how many hours you were allowed to spend in a coffee shop, you wouldn't have enjoyed yourself or done well.


Postdoc interview with many inquiries I was invited for a postdoc interview. It was 1h 30min long with 2 professors (via Skype). After the interview, they asked me to present at their lab meeting in the next 2 weeks (optional, about my PhD studies, also via Skype). In addition, they also asked me to send my PhD thesis (optional, before the meeting). So is it normal for PI to request so many things like this for non-advertised postdoc position? Should I agree to do all of the inquiries? They ask for my thesis before the meeting - it looks like a second PhD defense.

So is it a good place to work? Do you guys think this PI is too hard?

The PI isn't asking for anything unreasonable.  In fact, I really like the idea of participating in the lab meeting via Skype.  This way the mentor can see how you interact with the whole lab without adding major inconvenience or expense.

As to "Should I agree...?"  -- if you'd like the job, you should probably do it.


Can a school change their admission decision before April 15th? I have been accepted at a good school in the U.S. with full-funding. However, I am still waiting on the status of three very good U.S. schools as well.

Can the school that already sent me an offer of acceptance change their mind before April 15th?

I want to wait until I receive all the schools letters and make a decision around the 1st week of April, but I'm worried that just in case nobody else accepts me; what if the first school that accepted me changes their mind? Is that a possible scenario?

I am very experienced with admissions in the U.S., in particular in math programs at my R1 university: unless you grossly falsified something in your application, it would be very unusual, and substantial professional misconduct, and would not be even contemplated as a dignified option, for a grad program to recant on an offer of admission and funding.

The only to-me-conceivable scenario would involve catastrophic budget problems at the university ... since, after all, grad student funding is a tiny bit of the whole.

So, at least approximately, I'd recommend thinking of the offer of grad admission and funding as a far more reliable contract than most others you'll encounter in life. (Car repair estimates? Real estate appraisal? Promises of eternal friendship :)

So, quite seriously, you should not worry about it (if the offer is from a reputable, long-established university (e.g.) in the U.S. that is not filing for bankruptcy etc.


Heavy imposter syndrome What are best ways/resources to deal with imposter syndrome or runaway thoughts? I recently published a paper (only my 2nd first author) and was excited about it for about 2 mins before I got very bad anxiety over it. I found some novel findings in my paper and so far it has been well received but I keep thinking "I'm proposing a a new thing that hasnt been seen in the field, what if it was a fluke and can't be repeated and I end up losing my career in science." I did my due diligence in the experiments but I have lost sleep over this thought, and have started to doubt myself as a scientist. I don't have insurance at the moment so can't see a therapist but I was wondering if there were online tools to help with this.

Let me suggest something other than imposter syndrome and that if any such tools exist they probably won't help you.

One common reaction to completing a major piece of work is letdown since your life now seems empty. What was filled with work and the expectation of success now is filled with a big blank.

Another possible aspect is fear of the unknown. You have put something out there, hoping for wide acceptance, but it hasn't yet come, not having time enough yet to be really seen.

But, the reviewers thought enough of the work to recommend its appearance and the editor(s) agreed. So you do have a bit of evidence that you haven't failed.

And even if it can't be reproduced, it needn't be the end of your career if you have done due diligence in your research.

The cure, is easy, actually. (Well, maybe hard.) Just go back to work. Talk to any collaborators and come up with some ideas that might be developed into the next big piece of your career. Then, just get it done. Simple.


Boost grad apps profile without getting a second master's: Subject GRE? Self-study? Soft skills? In general, how does one boost PhD admission profile?

In my context, same question but besides getting a master's in pure math. (See here and here)

Here's what I got so far:

Employment not specifically in research for soft skills boost (I have specific career goals in case I am not good enough for academia)
Employment specifically in academic research (I've seen job posts that look for research assistants) for research experience here I think?
Employment as a research analyst in finance
Tests e.g. GRE Subject
Self-study

What else?

work for a professor for a research project like here I think?
Or pay a professor to supervise my own research projects like here I think?

My context:

I have a master's in applied math and want to get a PhD in pure math.
I'm applying to universities that don't require GRE, GRE Subject and IELTS/TOEFL for fluent English speakers.
My bachelor's grades are bad and my non-pure math master's grades are bad.
I've had a lot of research projects in master's (mostly by group) and cannot get very strong letters of recommendation from main research project (sort of a thesis, also by group) supervisors.
I am applying for 2018-9 admissions.

What about the GRE Subject?

I was suggested by one of my professors to study for GRE Subject, but I think that was in the context of his applying to master's having had only a bachelor's.

On one hand:

The GRE Subject may make up for low grades or the fact that I haven't had complex analysis, number theory, graph theory and abstract algebra. Is that right?

On the other hand:

The GRE Subject doesn't seem to show ability for research. Am I wrong?
It just seems to be able to show that you know complex analysis, abstract algebra and other things that, while are expected of math PhD applicants, are hopefully expected to be able to be learned by math/applied math master's holders, that you take exams well, know precalculus or calculus tricks or pathologicals (cf. pathologicals in real analysis are important!) and haven't forgotten very basic facts that you haven't encountered in higher math.
Even if I were to study the basics of complex analysis, abstract algebra, number theory and graph theory I'm not sure that that translates to a much higher GRE score. Does it? Or can it help graduate applications in some other way?
I mean come on, if it's just for the GRE Subject Test, of course I'm just gonna use Schaum's Outlines or a GRE Subject book instead of actually learning from a textbook. I would rather learn from a textbook, but I don't see how the learning beyond the basics is helpful for graduate applications (cf. graduate school).

P.S. Sucks if I don't stand a better chance for boosting admissions through self-study. Sigh. Can't believe there's a dichotomy between doing what is helpful for graduate school and what is helpful for graduate applications, but then again professors aren't the only stakeholders.

I have a master's in applied math and want to get a PhD in pure math. I'm applying to universities that don't require GRE, GRE Subject and IELTS/TOEFL for fluent English speakers.

From the context of the rest of your question, it seems clear that you are mostly applying to pure math PhD programs in the US.  But in that case: more than half of these programs require or strongly recommend the GRE math subject exam.  So I don't understand why you would restrict yourself in this way.  It doesn't make a lot of sense to plan your graduate education and future career around not wanting to take a certain exam.

  My bachelor's grades are bad and my non-pure math master's grades are bad.

Well that's bad, sorry to say.  Having higher grades in pure math in your master's program will help a bit, but grades are much more meaningful and competitive for undergraduate students than for graduate students.  (For that matter, what constitutes an unsatisfactory grade is much different for graduate students.  In my math graduate program, a student needs to maintain a 3.0 GPA in order to be in good academic standing.)

  I've had a lot of research projects in master's (mostly by group)

Group research projects will not be weighted highly by most pure math PhD programs.

  and cannot get very strong letters of recommendation from main research project (sort of a thesis, also by group) supervisors.

And that's also bad, sorry to say.

  On the one hand, the GRE Subject may make up for low grades or the fact that I haven't had complex analysis, number theory, graph theory and abstract algebra.

Number theory and graph theory are completely optional classes in most American programs.  Complex analysis and abstract algebra are not.  Not having these courses, especially as a master's student, and wanting to get a PhD in pure math is once again bad, I'm sorry to say.  Complex analysis and algebra are courses that most PhD students would take (or place out of) in their first year in the program.  If you haven't had undergraduate courses in these, you would be starting behind most students with bachelor's degrees.  That you haven't taken these courses as a master's student is yet more concerning: it seems to undermine your stated interest in a pure math PhD program.

The keys to a strong application for pure math PhD programs are:

Good GRE scores.
Good grades received in courses which the committee will recognize as either good preparation for graduate courses or the equivalent versions of basic graduate courses.
Strong recommendation letters.

So I'm sorry to say that your application sounds like it will not be strong on any of these fronts.

  How does one boost PhD admission profile...

You boost your PhD admission profile by improving on 1. through 3.

  Anything else?

Nothing that is as important as what I've said above.

  Is it possible to work for a professor for a research project?

Yes, but in pure math PhD admissions, research projects are not weighted very strongly at all, as has been discussed thoroughly on this site.  Especially, the very few students who can do serious pure math research before they begin a PhD program will (with very large probability) be exceptionally strong on the metrics 1. through 3. above anyway.

  Or pay a professor to supervise my own research projects?

Wait, what?  Definitely don't do that.

  But on the other hand, the GRE Subject doesn't seem to show ability for research...

Admission to a PhD program is not a debating contest that can be won if you find the right argument.  Overall you seem to be asking how to spin a poor application into a good one.  Well, you can't...or certainly, you can't if that's what admissions faculty realize you're trying to do.  If you want to convince us that the metrics we're using our faulty, here's how to do it: get a PhD in math, get a job at a university with a math PhD program, join the graduate admissions committee, and argue that applications should be weighted differently or that certain metrics should not be used at all.

  Even if I were to study the basics* of complex analysis, abstract algebra, number theory and graph theory I'm not sure that that translates to a much higher GRE score. Does it?

I thought you hadn't even taken the GRE Subject exam, so I'm confused when you talk about a "higher GRE score."  Certainly I would advise you to take the GRE Subject Exam now (or ASAP; I think it is too late for the 2017-2017 admissions season) and see how you do.  It is certainly possible to get a good score without this coursework.  Whether it helps to increase your GRE scores is a kind of irrelevant question to my mind...it helps your application a lot to take these courses anyway, and it helps you to take these courses and know this material (some of it more than others, as mentioned above).

  *I mean come on, of course I'm just gonna use Schaum's Outlines or a GRE Subject book instead of actually learning from a textbook,

(Probably not the point, but: although students treat "Schaum's Outlines" as being the mathematical equivalent of Cliff's Notes, many old-timers know that you could do worse than trying to learn a subject from these books.  Gian-Carlo Rota famously wrote on this subject, praising several of the books in the series.  When I taught linear algebra a few years ago and spoke to one of my older colleagues, he lent me his copy of the corresponding Schaum's Outline: it was very nicely done in many respects.)

Why "of course"?!?  At this point you've halfway convinced me that you don't actually want to be a pure math PhD student.  You seem to have one or more unstated assumptions that are strongly undermining your stated assumptions.  I can't tell exactly what they are, but I suggest some introspection on this point on your part.


How to avoid plagiarism if I am learning from other's code? I am taking a class that gave us a broad assignment: apply effect to a series of pictures via python. It did not include any lectures on the underlying principles of effects as it would be too broad to cover all.

I am trying to apply focus stacking, but as I didn't know the underlying principles of it (always done it in photoshop). I have looked up the technique of how it is done and landed on a GitHub repo that demonstrated how to do it. I followed along the code and learned the steps of doing it. But in result my code looks very similar to what I just learned.

I didn't copy and paste any of the code, but I did follow along the steps, I would assume this is still plagiarism? Do I just need to pick a new subject and don't look at any code during the learning process?

You could add a (conspicuous) comment to the code explaining how you wrote the code and that you used the tutorial from GitHub. If you credit your sources and explain how the code come about, it can never be plagiarism.

You could also ask your lecturers in advance whether they think what you did is acceptable. When it comes to programming assignments, there is some variance from lecturer to lecturer in what they consider acceptable.


How to do research after Ph.D when you have less time? I have joined an institute as an assistant professor from some time. I have done my PhD in computational mathematics. I am very much interested in research and spend lot of time and I really enjoy it. During my Ph.D I have done my research independently as well as some time with Ph.D supervisor. During my Ph.D  I use to spend large amount of my time in research. The problem is now I have been involved in academic and other activities, so I am not able to spend that amount of time. I am not able to collaborate with others as there is no collaborator in the university.

Question : How to do research after Ph.D when you have less time?

There are a few ideas. The first is to set aside some time each week for your own research. A few hours in a block, perhaps.

The next is to keep a research notebook (or a small pack of index cards) with you at all times so that you can (a) review existing cards and (b) jot down any ideas that occur. Especially keep ideas for things that might be explored when you have he time.

Third, and very important, is to develop a circle of collaborators wherever you can find them. If not possible at your own university, perhaps at a nearby one. But there are also conferences that you can probably attend and meet people with similar interests. Follow up with authors of papers you find interesting. Modern communication makes even international collaboration quite easy if you all write a common language.

Doctoral study is very intense and most people have few obligations other than the research. That changes for many upon graduation, especially if teaching is a big part of the job. But you can also interest a few advanced undergraduates in your research, perhaps.


How do I get out of my problem of not achieving results, feelings of worthlessness, guilt and rejection? I am currently a PhD student in a biomedical related field.
I came a long way. I first did my undergraduate and worked for a few years, though not research related. Later, I identified my research interest before embarking in the PhD with the hope of fulfilling my career dreams. I used to love and enjoy science, but that was long ago. I was happy when I got into the PhD program. Now I'm nearly 2 years into my study, mostly 'wet' lab and basic sciences research.

Unfortunately, my experiments - most of them - fail. Initially, that was due to lack of skills and experience - with time things have improved but I am still lacking good results that can give clear direction in my work.
My project has been modified a few times because initially there were problems with the biological samples so I had no choice. Then, I tried to 'reproduce' a piece of result done by a colleague few years ago but the results were always 'off' no matter how many times I did it. Even someone else with better experience in the lab tried but could not replicate the same result. The conclusion was perhaps, change in phenotype of biological samples over time.
Then my project changed again, and the technique is now becoming more complicated and 'taxing'. Partly, because my supervisor is not very happy and feels that it is time I should be producing good data and should aim for higher impact. With more complicated experiments, I also need to beef up my basic sciences knowledge but as someone coming from a different background it is taking me extra time to grasp. With my confidence going in a downward spiral.

I am finding more and more difficult to articulate my thoughts clearly to my peers and I feel constant 'rejection' and 'guilt'. Most of my colleagues are actually good people, but harsh words, although not ill-meaning, are slowly eroding my confidence. When I ask questions because there is something that I don't fully understand (without prior knowledge and not something I can read up on), people appear impatient and ask back (e.g. "why are you asking?",  "what do you think?", or just "I can't give an answer to you on this"). It feels more and more difficult for me to ask questions or speak up for myself.

One day, I was blamed for something (from someone outside the lab) that I didn't even do. The accusation was pretty unreasonable - others who witnessed the event felt the same - but to me I felt I was just a bully target. I just broke down and cried because I realized I couldn't take the stress and frustration of rejections and failure.
My friend in the same lab gave me some counseling but also at the same time asked me whether working in this lab is truly what I want to do. I don't want to quit my PhD, but then again I don't know how I can get out of this situation.

Should I change project?
But my PhD qualifying exam is coming up and I am having a massive problem with writing up a good proposal because of all the frustrations happening.
Should I change to dry lab?
I am afraid of talking to my mentor because I don't know whether at my current mental state I'll just suddenly break down again.

In summary, my resentment and contradictory statements that I receive:

Ideology: To do a PhD, perseverance is more important than being smart.
Reality: You need to be smart. REALLY SMART.
Ideology: There's not such thing as a stupid question. Ask if you don't understand.
Reality: Huh? Why do you even ask?

Should I change project?
  Should I change to dry lab?

A PhD can be extremely frustrating and discouraging.  Whatever you do, don't make a major decision while you are stressed and upset. Take a deep breath (and maybe a day off) and decide what you need to focus on.

Since you will be qualing soon, you likely need to spend a significant amount of time studying for that.  Passing your quals are important, and will likely give you a confidence boost.

Secondly, consider finding a social outlet.  Many grad departments have a weekly social meet-up at a bar.  Apart from meeting people that work in different labs, it is also quite likely you will meet other people who have gone through this issue, and will help you.


Do I have a MSc degree if I did the work but did not pay tuition? I have a BSc degree from a private university in Egypt. The university offered me a scholarship at the beginning of the program but that scholarship applied only partially to a subsequent MSc degree.

There's an overlap in the degree requirements for the BSc and the MSc, which means that the 5th year of the BSc is also the first year of the MSc. By doing research for 6 more months, the MSc degree is complete. The scholarship applied to everything but those 6 months, yet the tuition for that was very expensive.

Since I was a top ranked student, my dean said that if I did research at an associate research institute abroad he will ask the university's top management to

officially enroll me in the program,
delay payment of the tuition,
and consider offering me a scholarship for the remaining tuition

with one caveat: He will not know their decision until the very end of the program.

I took that risk, and successfully defended and submitted my thesis at the end of the program. While the university agreed to #1 and #2, my dean's attempts at #3 were fruitless. I have proof that I was enrolled as an MSc student and the university printed my degree's certificate but they will not hand it to me unless I pay the full tuition, which I can not.

My question is: Do I have a MSc degree or not? How should I address this on my CV/Resume?

No.

Unless your university is willing to provide proof that they granted you a degree, they didn't.  Listing an MSc degree on your résumé that your university is unwilling to confirm invites accusations of fabrication, which would be nearly impossible to refute and which could cost you your job many years in the future.

On the other hand, nothing stops you from publishing your thesis, or asking your dean for a recommendation letter explaining the unfortunate situation.


Why was I advised to contact prospective advisors when following up on my PhD application? I applied for a PhD program in a US university for Spring 2021 in the 1st week of August, 2020. I have mentioned a professor's name and work, who encouraged me to apply and permitted me to write his name in the SOP. However, after 1 month, in the reply to my follow-up email, the graduate coordinator advised me to contact prospective advisors in the department.
Two possible things in my mind:

The grad coordinator has not read my application or has not noticed my possible adviser's name in the SOP.

The grad coordinator has sent the application to the professor and the professor declined to take me in his lab. Thus, the grad coordinator advised me to find other advisers for funding.

What might be the reason?

My best guess is that it was just a standard reply. Otherwise I think you would have gotten more information.
But you should contact that professor again and discuss the state of your application and whether they are still willing to take you on.
Don't make assumptions here.


What's an appropriate phrasing of a caveat about self-citation? I'm writing some report, and at a certain point I give an example by citation. The citation format is such that you don't see any names (e.g. "[123]") without visiting the bibliography; or maybe it's just initials. And I wasn't the only author. I would like to "warn" my readers to take the citation with a grain of salt, as I am relying on what is at least partly, if not mostly, my own perspective or my own arguments elsewhere. At the same time, I don't want it to sound like I'm boasting about being an author; nor that I'm making a stronger pitch of the cited paper; nor that I'm disparaging it somehow.

What's a good way to phrase this limite-caveat/weak-warning?

Note:

I'm currently writing alone, am not using the first-person voice at all, and have just a handful third-person  "it is the author's opinion that" and similar expressions.
I can't presume to individually take the credit for the work in [123] which was a group effort.

"In previous  work [1-3] the author showed that ..."
or
"We have recently shown that ... [1-3]"

With phrases like that I never had a complaint from a peer-reviewer.


Writing a single authored research paper in a math journal: Is this a significant achievement? An engineering graduate with a below average grade, being in industry not related to math, for almost 10 years, with no previous publication record in any field, while still working full time, publishing a single authored research paper in a reasonable mathematics journal with zero guidance from anyone. Is this a significant achievement, and would this be a substantial factor for getting a PhD position in an applied math department at a US university or European university with good reputation or if not a reasonably good university?

Edit: (added as per suggestion)
Journal Name : Journal of Applied Analysis

Writing single-authored papers in math is extremely common, much more so than in other disciplines. It's not considered a significant achievement on its own in the context of applying for jobs.

Writing a paper before the beginning of a PhD is however certainly a big plus for you. But how much this will help depends on the journal: if you had the misfortune of publishing in a bad journal, I am sorry to say that this will actually hurt your application. It also depends on your field: I'm in pure math, but maybe in some areas in applied math it's expected of applicants to PhD positions to already have papers. Your question is a bit too general.


Does graduating a UK PhD in 5 years look bad (with circumstance) So in UK, people generally complete their PhD in 3.5 to 4 years.

Before, I intended to finish in 4 years as I wanted time to publish everything before writing up. Towards the end of 3rd year, I applied for a grant to do research abroad which could be anywhere between 1 and 12 months which I got accepted for earlier this year. I originally planned to do 2 to 3 months for experience (and a mini-holiday), but in the end decided to work for 12 months as it is in a good research group and I would like a publication out of it.

For this to work within the time period, I have decided to start this position 2 months before the PhD submission deadline, in which I will come back to UK after to submit - meaning I have put my PhD on suspension for a year (which has been accepted). I will not be able to finish my thesis before I go so that is why I am doing it this way.

The position itself counts as a post-doc, even though I have not graduated my PhD. I understand this may look good as I have applied and got my own funding for this, but also thought it might look strange in academic bios, as graduation years are usually listed. Therefore people see that I took 5 years to complete it (whereas in reality it is 4 years + 1 year suspension).

Any thoughts on how academics may perceive this kind of bio?

I'm not in the UK, but if you would accept that your question is "Does graduating with a PhD 1 year later than normal look bad?" I would say no, it doesn't, and especially if it results in 1 additional good publication, it might even look better. As @ProfSantaClaus mentions, publication records are typically most important.

Additionally, having received a presumably competitive grant looks good, doing work with an additional research group looks good, and expanding your network by working with another research group is also good.

I wouldn't worry too much about this as long as the whole process makes good sense for you in other ways, and it sounds like it does.


How to edit name on existing publications after a name change? Assume that I publish many papers in many journals and someday I changed the family name (my last name). How can I edit that where my papers have been published? and is it easy process?

I am afraid that you can't easily change the name on a published article. Publishing is (at least theoretically) still done on print, so there is simply no way to change the physical journal once it has been sent to university libraries all over the world. Even for more important issues such as plagiarism or factually incorrect data, only an errata is issued, or the paper is marked as "retracted".

What you can do instead is advertising the double name on your webpage and CV, and ensuring that the academic databases (such as Web of Science and Scopus) correctly recognize and handle your name change, marking all of your papers as written by a single author. You will probably need to notify them using the "contact us" functions on their websites.

Several authors in the same situation choose to keep the old name also on new papers; this makes it simpler for other researchers to recognize you, at the price of using a name that you might have disowned and now consider a relic from the past. In practice, there is no requirement that your academical nom de plume coincides with the one that is written on your ID and that you use on legal papers, so you are free to sign your papers using a different version of it. Once you choose this route, however, it will be more practical if you consistently use the old name also when attending conferences.

If you are simply getting married, then signing your papers with both surnames is probably the easiest option. (I realize that probably you have already considered and discarded this option, but I thought it more appropriate to include it in my answer anyway.)


What should I do if actually I found a serious flaw in someone's PhD thesis and an article derived from that PhD thesis? Recently, I came across a PhD thesis and an article derived from that PhD thesis and found a serious flaw in them that actually makes their conclusions invalid.

In the first place, I was unsure if I'm right or not, so I contacted the guy that wrote the PhD thesis and subsequent article and described my concerns and I showed my calculations to him and asked if he thinks in fact there is a major problem in his PhD thesis and that article, which is derived from it. He responded back that embarrassingly, in fact I'm right and there is a problem but he can't do anything about it.

I didn't want to force him to do something but I'm just thinking maybe there might be a possibility to publish an erratum for at least that article. It's a major flaw and unfortunately it just invalidates the major conclusions of paper and PhD thesis. Surprisingly, the article is cited for 15 times and nobody found that obvious problem. My question: What's the best way to deal with these kind of situations that even author himself/herself admits that in fact there is a major flaw in his/her thesis or article?

One possibility is for you to write a paper on your reanalysis. Often this would need to be something more than pointing out the flaw alone, but that may be discipline-dependent. If the flaw you have detected is a key part in your own analysis of your work, including your updated analysis in a larger article (while citing their paper) is a smooth way to point out how you had to change the method.

The second possibility is that many journals (at least in my area) allow for Comments on articles they have published. These are for just this purpose - to point out something 'wrong' about a paper that has been published. If the editors decide to proceed with it, the original authors are usually given an opportunity to craft a Reply piece to agree, disagree, alter, whatnot. Then they are published back-to-back in the journal.


Pure mathematics graduate scholarships in Europe for international students with a bachelor degree only in engineering? Short Question: Are there any graduate (PHD or masters) pure math scholarships available in Europe for  international (non-European) engineering students ? I would like to get examples.

Long Question: I am a mechanical engineering major who wants to study mathematics at a graduate level. Due to extreme circumstances, I wasn't able to get a bachelor degree in mathematics. However, I self studied lots of mathematics. I self studied graduate math topics as well. Some mathematicians at my university were following some of my mathematical progress for 2-3 years. I expect to get excellent recommendation letters from them. I also coauthored a paper with one of these mathematicians (not published yet). I also participated in a national math competition held at my country four times and achieved first position. Thus, I believe the only thing I am lacking is a bachelor in mathematics. Another problem is that my GPA in engineering isn't too high (because I lacked interest in my engineering courses), it lies in the open interval ]3.3,3.35[.

Specifically, I would like to know about scholarship opportunities in Europe where a person with a strong math background but without an undergraduate degree in mathematics is likely to be accepted.

An example of a scholarship that I know of is this one :

https://diploma.ictp.it/application-admission/diploma-programme

However, it doesn't meet the criteria for this question since it requires applicants to have a bachelor degree in mathematics.

In the nordic countries the funding is provided by the PI, and the hard criteria are very relaxed. From a random PhD offer in one Swedish university:

Entry requirements
To meet the general entry requirements for
third-cycle studies, an applicant must have

taken a second-cycle qualification
completed course requirements for at least 240 higher education credits, including at least 60 second-cycle higher education credits,
or
otherwise acquired essentially the same knowledge in or outside Sweden.

(As Dave Clark points out, second cycle qualification is a masters degree.)
Other universities I have checked require the equivalent of four years of course work, with a project of at least 15 credits ECTS or equivalent. And I remember some just require three years (but good luck proving you are ready for a PhD with that!).
This is only the hard requirements imposed by the university. Then, you just need to show your future supervisor that you have the necessary knowledge, and convince him you are the best candidate.
The best thing? Application is free, you just need to spend a few hours composing good letters.


Transcribing non-native speakers of English who are presenters at an international conference? An international conference on sericulture will be held in Japan soon, and I need to create a transcription of the oral presentations. There will be 10 to 20 presentations, and almost all speakers will likely be non-native speakers of English.

I have little experience listening to non-native speakers. Also, I’ve only transcribed interviews so far. Do you think I can transcribe the presentations myself, or would it be a huge hassle?  Should I use a transcription service? I want to save money if I can. Transcribing half of it myself and hiring a transcription service for the other half might be the way.

I record the presentations then transcribe at home. The language of the conference is English.

I would appreciate any advice!

I assume you mean that the language of the conference is English and that people will be trying to do their best to speak English.

I think that, while it might be possible that you do it yourself, you are trading time for money. It probably can't be done quickly by a single person, no matter the skills, so a service might be much quicker. I assume that transcribing the talks into "better - more standard" English will require some consultation with each speaker on various subtleties. So, yes, a huge hassle, though do-able if you have the time.

I think it would be even harder unless you are familiar with the native language of each speaker.

I think you will also want to get each speaker to sign off on your transcription, however it is done. Some may have questions or even corrections.


PhD: Accepted into another PhD program - should I finish the current semester in my old program? As the title says - I've been accepted into another (better) PhD program that is far more aligned with my interests and will be a better place for my dissertation; should I finish out my current semester of doctoral coursework or just take the "W"s and be done with it (only my 3rd semester, not ABD yet)? I don't need these credits in my new program; further, finishing this semester is going to be a PAIN and will probably negatively effect my perfect GPA (it's a heavier than normal load + I got behind in applying to my new program). Will withdrawing mid-semester (I'm still within the window for properly doing so) have unforeseen consequences?

Thoughts? Advice? Public Bludgeoning?

You got a high GPA so you might have a better chance of getting into a Phd program.

You already got accepted into the program of your choice, so at the moment your GPA is useless.

Your only consideration should be when you want to start, if you like the courses so much that you'd take them for general interest, and if you want to do something after your Phd where GPA suddenly counts again (instead of publications / references).


I have a strong suspicion and weak proof that the data in the paper are fake. What to do? I reviewed a paper submitted for a smallish magazine. It presented an algorithm to perform some allocation task and compared its performance to that of several other algorithms from the literature performing the same task in several ways (the results, i.e. the allocation, can be evaluated based on the usage of several different resources, so a result could use less of resource A, but more of resource B, and so on).

My opinion was that, although the algorithm was badly presented and the paper was nigh-incomprehensible, the results presented seemed good, so the authors deserved another shot at better explaining themselves, so I did not suggest to reject it altogether.

The first review round went through with a unanimous "major revisions" verdict.

Then I was asked to review the second submitted version of the paper too. In this new version, the algorithm had been compared to a much broader range of algorithms. Problem is: even though the algorithms it was being compared to changed, the comparison charts remained exactly the same, and looking at them side-by-side revealed no difference whatsoever (no explicit numerical data was provided).

What is worse is that the change was not even one-to-one. In the first submission, the algorithm (let's call it A) was compared with the same three other algorithms in all categories (resource A usage, resource B usage etc.) while in the second submission, each resource comparison involved different algorithms, so for example, A was compared to B,C and D in resource A utilization, but it was compared to C, E and F in resource B utilization, and so on.

Nonetheless, each chart in the second submission was identical to one from the first submission.

At this point, I was fairly certain that at least the second round of comparisons had been completely faked, i.e. the authors just changed the labels on the charts.

Asking one of my senior coworkers, I was advised to just ignore the issue and to not raise a ruckus, since this issue has a high chance of backfiring: we are not an academic institution, we are the R&D department of a pretty small private firm, hence we have very little political weight and scientific reputation.

I am wondering if I really should raise this issue with the editor, with whom my firm has business relations, as we are partners in several government-funded projects, or I should heed the advice of my colleague.

While the paper has very little chance of being published as the second submission is also nigh-unreadable, a co-author of this paper has an extremely high h-index (100+), hence I feel if my suspicion is founded, it really should be brought to the light.

You should definitely report your concern, but assume good faith.

This certainly sounds like a significant problem.  However, fabricating data is a very serious (even career-ending) allegation. You shouldn't accuse someone of this without very strong evidence, and I don't think you have it in this case. There could be an innocent explanation.

You might have misunderstood what they are doing. For example, rather than running all new tests, did they use the same results for their algorithm, but then compare it to different algorithms?  (I'm not sure from the question whether this would be possible).
It could be a simple error.  For example, what if they accidentally opened the wrong image file and added labels to it?

I would raise the issue, but rather than saying "this looks faked", something like this:

  The authors purport to have run new comparisons, and yet the results on the graphs are exactly the same as in their previous draft.  I don't understand how this can be correct.  Could they please explain, or correct the graphs if necessary?

Another thing you should do is ask for more detailed results and more information about their methods. It sounds like their reporting on what they have done is far from adequate. How they respond to this request might give more evidence on whether the results might be faked. If they are unable to convincingly explain the strange results and fully describe their methods, you should then at least raise the concern with the editor.  I don't think you have enough cause to do that yet, though.

If there is further action to be taken, it will be the editor's responsibility.  Here is what the Committee on Publication Ethics recommends to editors in this situation.  If the authors cannot satisfactorily explain themselves, it should result in a report to their institution and an investigation.


University metalshop / makerlab - metric or imperial? I'm applying for some funds to set up a small makerlab-type metalshop in my department (American research university, although I should note that I'm in the social sciences). My plan is to get a CNC mill and lathe along with some 3D printers for rapid prototyping of equipment.

My question is whether to get metric or imperial CNCs. Yes, it's easy to flip the display controllers between metric and imperial, but the gearing of the mill itself is usually based on a metric or imperial leadscrew, so that 1 turn of the handwheel turns a certain metric/imperial based distance.

I checked the other metalshops at my university and they are use imperial-unit Bridgeport mills and lathes. I myself grew up in a metric country (i.e., somewhere other than the US, Liberia, and Burma) and so find this incredibly backwards.

Is there any good reason to go with imperial-based lathes and mills -- except for the cost of finding a good metric one?

Note 1: For lathes, it is relatively easy to change the gearing for metric, so this is not as much of an issue as it is for mills where the X, Y, and Z leadscrews and indicators  would need to be swapped out. Not to mention the difficulty in sourcing metric borers and bits...

The decision will be decided based on where, or in what, you think the resulting parts will be used. Since you are in the US, going for the imperial would make most sense.If you start machining metric based parts you will soon find that you may have problems adding off the shelf parts. I think the sound way forward is to figure out if you will depend on parts from elsewhere and to what extent these will likely be metric or imperial. Being able to switch will solve some issues but as you state, if there are mechanical differences in the machinery, you may end up with less accurate parts when switching to whatever system the machinery was not made for.


How to convey your full length paper in conference through slides? I am a PhD student works in computer algebra(Theoretical computer science). I have published one research paper recently, I am currently making slides for the paper. It is my first time and believe me I am struggling a lot. I have spent 4 days but till now not able to convey the idea that I want to deliver to the audience. I have given 30 mins for the presentation. My algorithm is based on 4-5 other algorithm with few lemma and some modification to previous algorithms. I am confused how to make slides such that I can convey my work efficiently.

Should I focus more on modified previous results or on new lemma. Should I first explain them notations and definition or directly go to the results.

Questiom : How to convey your full length paper in conference through slides?

Edit : Audience is Professor and Ph.D students of computer science and mathematics.

In a short face to face presentation, remember that insight is much more important and valuable than detail. People aren't going to remember the detail, and can get it from the paper if they need it, but they will remember if you can show them why your main result is true from a chain of insights.


What correspondance for corresponding author? I was wondering what kind of correspondance should one have with persons denominated as corresponding authors ?

Let's assume one was reading through a paper and did not understand a specific point. Is that a reason to mail the corresponding author ?

I've read through the different answers that it is in general the main contributor of the work. So, what are the reasons one can encounter being sufficient to make contact ?

All correspondence regarding the paper should go to the corresponding author (with very few exceptions).

If you should contact them with requests for clarification is a judgment call. If you are a student not understanding it, you should probably first discuss it with your supervisor. If you are an experienced scientist and believe that there is insufficient information or even an error, asking them would be appropriate.

Me and my colleagues have also (successfully) contacted corresponding authors with requests for access to data for a meta analysis or to invite them to a workshop (all expenses paid).

So there are a number of legitimate reasons to contact a corresponding author. That's why the contact data is given in the manuscript.

However, from the perspective of a corresponding author, most correspondence you receive is usually with the journal (and spam from other journals and conferences).


Papers published during undergraduate degree: can they form the basis to a PhD? I'm presently finishing up my undergraduate degree in Mathematics, and have written a number of papers, three of which have been published in reputable combinatorial journals (think journals published by Elsevier and Springer). From these three, I am the sole author on two of them.
Given that I have invested so much time and energy on 'extra curricular activities' (as my head of department calls them), can they serve as the basis to a PhD thesis? Which is to say, can a considerable part of a thesis consist of previous work which has not been used to obtain any other degree?
This final remark is important, I feel. A fourth paper with my supervisor is in the works, but the material presented there will appear in my undergraduate dissertation. I am then of the opinion that this material should not be used toward another degree.
If it helps, I attend a northern European university, and intend on doing a PhD in Europe/UK/USA.
Edit: I would like to perhaps mention the motivation for asking this question. I have heard stories of people doing research in their private capacity, then doing a PhD in quite a short period of time (a year or so), since they had a lot of material already. I cannot imagine this being the case however. What are your thoughts on this?

I don't think this is impossible, but I doubt that many doctoral programs would permit it. Not zero, but not many. That is up to your university and an advisor.
You have published some papers which is good and will likely win you a slot at a good place, but there are "papers" and there are papers. If you have proof of some hundred year old conjecture that Erdős et al failed to prove then, sure.
But, since you seem to be good, I'd rather suggest that you spend the time it might take to earn a doctorate to do some even better work, ending up with a truly awesome CV and professors who will strongly support you in your career. I think that most places will still make you pass comprehensive exams, showing that your knowledge and skill isn't too narrow.
In the US, finances aren't a problem (unless you need to support a large family) as you will normally have a TA (or more likely an RA in your case) so that you get both a tuition waiver and a stipend.
But the early work you have done can certainly form the basis of what you will need to do for a dissertation. You might find the faculty of the right institution helpful in extending it, or not. But the experience would be a much more solid basis of a career than taking, what I think is a minimal path.
And, if you are as good as that then I'd think your path won't be all that long anyway. And the opportunity to get a bit of teaching experience as well will give you a better career base.
So, possible? Maybe. Advisable? Not so much.


How many minutes per day do most professors spend reading and replying to emails? I know that the time greatly varies from professor to professor, but what are some good 25th percentile to 75th percentile estimates? And does the time spent reading/replying to emails generally increase when the professor is teaching a class?

What are some other factors that influence the number of emails a professor receives?

I'm not sure what the exact percentiles are, but I'd estimate that most faculty members who handle their own emails (more on this below) probably spend on the order of an hour a day or more dealing with emails.

I think that emails don't necessarily increase when one is teaching as opposed to other times of the year—unless there are no TA's for the course. In that case, since the professor is the only contact point, emails will rise, although this depends on the course enrollment.

Other determining factors are more or less obvious: the more active and senior a professor is, the more emails they will get:

Professors with larger research groups will have more email traffic associated with group management.
Professors in larger departments will have more email originating at the department and committee level.
As professors move up the ladder, they are asked to participate in more reviews and external programs, which increases the burden still further.

On the other hand, one advantage that many senior faculty have is that they may have dedicated administrative assistants, whose responsibilities can include filtering out the unimportant messages for them.


Likelihood of an undergrad publishing from home I am interested to know what the likelihood is that an undergraduate would be able to publish an academic paper (particularly in a STEM field) from home. For the sake of argument, assume they are an advanced student, and work independently of any supervisor.

Is this something that is frequently done?
Would this look any better or worse on a CV than doing it under a supervisor?
Is this something that is likely to happen, in a reasonable time frame, if the student stayed committed?

At the beginning of my PhD, last year, I had several ideas, so after thinking long and hard about them, I suggested them to my supervisor. His most common answer was "that is a nice idea, they tried that in the 90's, it didn't work".

Later, I finished my first manuscript. I was quite proud of it, and I gave it to him for review. It came back with more red than black.

Also, don't forget the resources a professor can give you. As an undergrad, I had an idea for which I needed a couple of hours in a student lab using non consumable and safe equipment, but I wasn't allowed. I then suggested the project to a professor, and a word from him gave me full access to whatever lab I would need. Depending on your case, this may mean data, computers, or having a conversation with an expert in something you may be stuck with.

So, chances are that if you work by yourself, you will have the same problems. Either you will work on something irrelevant or some known dead end; and when you get a result, you will have a hard time putting it in a publication ready form. Take as an example your own question: you wrote one paragraph, and three people have already considered your post unclear. A several pages research article, where not even the researcher fully understands what is going on, is significantly more difficult.

You can, of course, go ahead and try to research something you find interesting on your own, but your chances of getting published are significantly lower than if you have a mentor. You would have to jump many more hurdles.


Why include a table of figures? Many postgraduate theses include as part of their front matter a List of Figures and a List of Tables, plus lists of various other special environments. Many institutions, including my own, directly require the inclusion of at least those two Lists at the front of the thesis.

However, I have never really understood why a thesis should have those two environments at all; they've mostly just been yet another page to scroll past on the way to the meat of the thesis.

On the other hand, if you have a print copy of the document, I generally find it much easier to flip through the pages, since graphics tend to stick out, and more so if you have a general idea of where the figure is (such as having a figure identifier that gives the chapter) or what it looks like (as when looking for a figure one has seen previously).

What use cases are lists of figures or tables meant to serve? In what situations are they meant to be useful? Do they still work, or are they simply an artifact of pre-pdf days?

When I refer back to a thesis to find a piece of information, I find the lists of tables and figures to be extremely useful. I often have a general idea of what I am looking for. Turning that general idea into a simple text search that does not yield hundreds of hits is difficult. By reading the short captions in the list of figures, I can generally find the figure I want.