How does authorship work in large collaborations? I am not in a field in which large (twenty authors or more) collaborations are common. However, I have always been interested in how authorship is distributed in those cases, particularly for extremely large collaborations (i.e., hundreds to thousands of collaborators).

How is it determined whether someone has had a signifficant contribution to yield authorship (i.e., why are there 436 authors and not 437 or 435)? How are authors listed (I know that LIGO, for instance, lists alphabetically)? How does one determine the major contributor? How is the paper drafted? Does everyone in the collaboration approve the paper?

How is it determined whether someone has had a signifficant contribution to yield authorship?

Very large collaboration are common in physics. I guess it started with collider physics experiments, and then it became common elsewhere (see LIGO). The general rule in very large (hundreds to thousands of authors) collaborations is that everybody who passes a minimum threshold of contribution to the experiment is an author.

More specifically, an author is typically somebody working in an institution who pays money/puts work into the building/running the experiment. He/she has to have served at least a number of months up to a year helping build or operate some of the experimental equipment before becoming an author. Some collaborations make this threshold a one-off, others a yearly commitment.
Interestingly, building the necessary hardware is seen as a natural qualification for becoming an author, while building the software infrastructure does not always count as a qualification for becoming an author.

Exceptions can be made on a paper-by-paper base when somebody who is not a typical collaborator but has contributed significantly to a paper is added to the author list of that paper only.  This is the typical case for theoretician who would like to use the experiment's data to prove/disprove a specific scenario.

Junior collaborators become senior enough to join the author list, less junior collaborators leave the collaboration, new institututions join the collaboration bringing in new collaborators. As a result, no two papers from the same collaboration in principle have to have the same number of authors; tracking the list of authors becomes another task to add to the long-list of large collaboration administrative jobs.

How are authors listed?

Given the impressive collaborators list length (ATLAS and CMS papers at CERN list approximately 2000 people each) then the simplest choice is to list all authors alphabetically. Such a large number of collaborators publish typically  of the order of 100 papers per year. It is thus natural to expect that no author will ever read all the papers produced by her/his collaboration. Realistically, in such instances the average authors read 15-30% of papers he/she signs as author.

How does one determine the major contributor?

There is typically no difference between a null/negligible contributor, a significant contributor, and a major contributor in the author list. The only exception to my knowledge of the author lists "rules" above is for the Belle collaboration. In Belle papers, the main authors are listed first, with the others following in alphabetical order. If a reader would like to contact a Belle paper authors, he/she can write them directly. In all other instances, a reader would write to some committee that might eventually redirect him/her to the actual authors.

How is the paper drafted?

The main authors of the result draft the paper; this is typically a team of 3 to 7 people, although much larger teams are possible for very important papers. The paper is then heavily scrutinized by an internally assigned committee, then handed over to another committee, then handed over to the another committee; in some instances handed over a fourth committee. The typical time it takes to work on the paper is thus in the hundreds of days - typically as long or longer than producing the result itself. However, scientists typically start working on some other projects while waiting for the committees feedback.

Does everyone in the collaboration approve the paper?

Not literally everyone. After the committees work, the general rule is the "opt-in". However, just as any author is allowed to comment on a paper before it gets released, any author can decide to opt-out of being an author for that paper (although it happens only in exceptional and heavily controversial instances).


What does “senior graduate student” mean in this context? I am an Indian student enrolled in an integrated master’s-of-science program and currently in my fifth (final) year of the program. So should I be called a senior graduate student or senior undergraduate student?

[Edit]: I read this https://www.numfocus.org/programs/john-hunter-technology-fellowship/ on the first line of second paragraph.
I quote that here:

  The program consists of a 6 month project-based training program for postdoctoral scientists or senior graduate students.

Also the eligibility is:

  Eligibility: Eligible applicants are postdoctoral scientists or senior PhD students, or have equivalent experience in physics, mathematics, engineering, statistics, or a related science.

Am I eligible? I am an Applied Mathematics student (maths major).

When talking about undergraduate studies, "senior" has a specific meaning in the US system, i.e. a student in their last year of a bachelor's degree.  But there isn't a specific meaning in the context of graduate studies; here "senior" just has the generic meaning of "more advanced, more experienced".  Of course, this is relative.

In the context you mention, referring to "postdoctoral scientists or senior PhD students", it seems clear to me that they mean a PhD student who is, at least, in the second half of their studies.  US PhD programs usually involve 2-3 years of advanced coursework, followed by dissertation research.  This program seems to be intended for students in the research stage, and it will likely expect that the students have a base of advanced knowledge in the relevant subfield.

From your description, I don't think you are eligible for this program.


General equivalence of physical chemistry II and undergraduate courses in quantum mechanics I am a chemistry major with an interest in mathematical physics. I am planning to take physical chemistry II (currently in p-chem I) and I am wondering if physical chemistry II can be considered equivalent to a course in elementary quantum mechanics. The course is primarily related to quantum chemistry and includes solutions for the Schrodinger equation in multiple dimensions, as well as particle in box situations, etc. I have also taken partial differential equations, so I am wondering if it would be feasible to jump into a qunatum mechanics II course?
My question is a bit convoluted, so forgive me, but anyone who has taken chemistry and physics: will I glean enough QM from p-chem and PDE to take a dedicated quantum mechanics II course (topics in QM II being perturbation theory, entanglement, etc.)

This depends a lot of the specific classes. Based on my anecdotal evidence, I'd say the classes are quite different.
My anecdotal evidence is that as a physics major, QM 1 was one of the easiest upper division classes I took. Griffiths was super clear. QM 2 was a bit more complicated, but I still thought the material wasn't as difficult as other subjects.
Then my friends in chemistry often talked about pchem like it was the hardest, most confusing class they barely made it through. They also didn't really seem to have the same view of QM I had, and tended to talk about it as if it were overly complicated.
I got the sense that their class focused more on applications of the ideas than the underlying principles, and the people who struggled were trying to memorize the individual applications. I don't know if they would have recognized the material from my QM class.


Appropriate way to thank a professor towards the end of the semester Let me first say that the I am a first semester student studying in North America coming from a very different cultural background, so I get confused as to what would be okay in not just college but also this part of the world. I am reaching towards to the of my first semester one of my professors has really inspired me and I would like to appreciate them. However I am confused if I should just write an email or give little handwritten card/note. Some questions that come to my mind are:

Should I give the note to the professor at the end of the last class (would my class mates judge me?) or give it during office hours?
I am performing really well in the professors class do I need to wait till the grades are in or is it okay to give it before that?
Is it okay to say “I hope I can take another class of yours in the future semesters”

My question might sound silly to ask this but I just don’t want to make the teacher uncomfortable especially since this is the first time for me in college and in such an environment.

In the U.S., probably best to not express thanks publicly, unless you are thinking to get others to join in. If you can put a thank-you note in the professor's paper-mail mailbox in their department, that might be optimal. It does demonstrate a bit more effort (and, thus, more non-trivial expression of thanks) than just an email, for example.

But an email thank-you is good, too.

And, yes, probably better to wait until after grades are settled, if there's any potential volatility there. Don't want to create even a hint of conflict-of-interest on any side.


How often is a bad review from the reviewers due to the potential competition with your work? Reviewers are expert in their fields who can understand your work but are also potential competitors if they worked in the same field as you do. How frequent is a bad review from the reviewers due to the potential competition with your work so they can stall your publication?

For example, if you were a reviewer, would you be excited to learn that I have published research that are superior to yours or prove that your research direction was wrong? Another extreme example, if you were an HIV researcher/reviewer, how excited/horrible would you feel if I publish a cure for HIV and will be nominated for Nobel prize tomorrow and you will be sitting down there listening to my talk?  What incentive do reviewers have to give out good/fair review?

In my experience:

If the editor is fair, it doesn't matter terribly much.

The decision to reject a paper is not taken by the reviewers.  The decision is taken by the editor. The role of the reviewers is to give a recommendation, upon which the editor takes a decision.  If a reviewer recommends rejection (or acceptance, for that matter), the editor is free to ignore this recommendation (this has happened to yours truly).  If the editor suspects that a reviewer recommends rejection because of potential competition, or for any other improper reason, then the editor should not weigh this recommendation heavily.  This is one of the reasons why there should always several reviewers — at least in my field (atmospheric remote sensing), I've only come across cases with two or three reviewers.

Secondly: The editor knows who the reviewer is.  If a scientist makes a habit of recommending rejections for improper reasons, he or she will get a reputation among editors.  Editors are usually well-known colleagues in the field, so you really don't want to be known as the envious guy (or gal) who will reject major works of research because it was not invented here.  In the best case, they won't be asked as reviewers any more.  In the worst case, it may harm a scientific career.

Perhaps the scenario described above is somewhat naive, but in those cases where I've either been a reviewer, or been corresponding author, it would apply.  The same for open review papers (such as the geophysical journal, published by EGU, Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics).  It might be different in other fields, this I don't know.  I hope that even in other fields, the editor does more than copy-paste and blindly follow whatever reviewers recommend.


Where to submit an incomplete work just for the sake of record I am an undergraduate student. One day an idea popped up in my mind about some theory. I started working on that and then I have to stop due to my very limited knowledge. I shared my incomplete work with my brother and he said that what I have is rubbish. May be it is rubbish and I cannot see what is wrong with it at present. If my work is useless, it doesn't matter but if it is of some use and somebody else found about it(independently without my incomplete work). In this case  I get no credit and it is fair too because I have not contributed to the final result.

The problem is, when I tell somebody that I have also worked on the same idea then no one would believe me.

So is there any way that I can submit my incomplete work online, so that it gets recorded. And maybe if my work is not rubbish then it may be of some help to others.

So is there any way that I can submit my incomplete work online, so that it gets recorded?

Congrats on your research idea! As I see it, you have two options:

Publish a blog post or put something up on a website.
Spend more time on polishing your work: ideally, by getting feedback from a professor or trusted expert. Within a few more months, put together the best write-up you can at this time. Then put the paper online, e.g. on arXiv.

Based on the information you provided, my preferred option in your situation would be (1). This is because:

You describe your idea as incomplete. If that is true, you don't want to present this as a finished paper to the community (attached to your name) when it is more of an idle curiosity that is not yet fleshed out.
It is very uncommon for undergraduates to be able to produce a publication-worthy paper without mentorship. So, what you need at this stage is a good professor, mentor, and advisor. Without that, statistically speaking you probably don't have the skills or knowledge yet to pursue this idea in the most effective direction.
If your brother is right that the idea is bad (I don't know your brother, so I can't say if he is just being mean :) ) then announcing it in a public venue like arXiv could be embarrassing later down the road. It doesn't really matter now (lots of crappy papers get published to arXiv), only later.

In contrast, writing a blog post has several advantages: for instance, it's not really embarrassing later (no one expects you to sound like an expert in a blog post).

Overall, I don't mean to discourage you -- the fact that you had a new idea and are excited about thinking about it is a sign that you would make a good researcher. Establishing a relationship with a professor is the natural next step, and they could also give better advice about whether this particular idea is worthwhile.


Should Research Associates apply for Post-Doc research positions if they want to? I live and work in the UK and my training is in Computer Science and Mathematics. I defended my PhD thesis eight years ago and since then gained work as an engineer, then a Post-doc Research Assistant, then a Teacher, and now a Research Associate. Is it fine for me to apply for another post-doc research assistant position, or is that not the done thing? I ask because in job progression terms the job title may seem to some University employers like "going backwards". I'm slightly bohemian when it comes to research positions - I'm not really concerned about fluctuations in pay, but rather whether the research is interesting.

There's no prohibition in most job postings against people like you applying for postdoc positions. In many cases, it will be rare, though, that someone would be selected who is 8 years past their PhD simply because most people recognize that postdoc positions are supposed to be training positions for people on their way to faculty jobs. That doesn't seem to be your trajectory, and so departments would probably pass you over. As they are training positions, postdoc positions are typically also strictly limited to 3 years which may or may not interest you.

The situation may be different if a postdoc position is paid for from grant money. In that case, the principal investigator may decide that to heck with training, I need to get this work done and this is the right person for it.

I don't think that you're doing yourself a disfavor if you apply. If it's a small enough community where people talk about each other, you may start to acquire a reputation as a bohemian without a clear career trajectory, but you already know that and so no harm done.


Providing APIs instead of directly providing data sets Several academic paper hosts such as PubMed and Cochrane give some machine readable access to their data by providing  APIs, but do not directly provide the data sets. Is there any reason why they don't provide some dumps of the data sets, aside from trying to save bandwidth and avoiding to cron dumps?

One obvious reason would be that providing an api instead of a dump allows them to see how people are using the data.  It's also quite possible that the data contains PPI that is necessary for aggregation, but which shouldn't be exposed for subject privacy reasons, so an api lets them still do the aggregation while masking the sensitive underlying data.


Does the order in which you list committee members in a dissertation matter? I am currently writing my PhD dissertation and was wondering in what order I should list committee members in my dissertation? What is a good order that does not offend anyone? I know the advisor has to be listed first. For the rest of the members, some of the options I considered were: (a) listing by decreasing order of seniority, (b) alphabetical, (c) list external last. The problem with (a) is that the senior most professor is an external (from a different university) and comes up before Profs from my own department. The problem with (b) and (c) are that the senior most person, who is also quite famous, now comes last. Am I overthinking this?

Probably you are overthinking it. If they have different roles you can list them with their role and avoid ordering problems. Otherwise I'd consider alphabetical.

I'll admit that in some fields there may be a tradition about how to do it, but I've never heard of that. And note that in some circles the one listed last is considered the most prominent. It is hard to really draw conclusions, hence alphabetical.

And, your advisor might have some good advice about this.


Getting stuck in a rut while writing a thesis I'm to write my MSc thesis soon, and am a bit worried that I will get stuck in a rut. By that I mean that I will have very little variety in my daily (work) life, and that it will not only be stressful, but also that I will sort of stare myself blind on the same problems every day.

Any advice? Do I even need to worry about this?

EDIT:

I probably didn't explain myself very well, because everyone seems to have misunderstood my question (don't get me wrong, I really appreciate the feedback, it's useful nonetheless).

I'll be working on the same problems for about 6 months. I'll probably get so tired of it. I'm wondering what I can do to avoid that making me crazy. RasterImage mentioned changing the work environment once in a while, that might do some good.

My adviser said to just "Get er done". I found that the biggest hurdle, as you alluded to, was how do I make real progress. Here are some ideas:

Decide on the sections of the thesis. (This may already be predetermined by your department.)
Write an outline of the thesis.
Get a template for the thesis.
Look at how others from your department organized/formatted their thesis.
Write an outline for each section of thesis.
Pour your knowledge into the thesis without worrying about sentence structure, spelling, thought flow, grammar, etc.
Use Mind-mapping tools to get your thoughts in writing.
Set small intermediate goals. (i.e. I am going to write the description of x result in 30 minutes.)
Make a game out of it. (i.e. I got x words written yesterday, today I am going to write x + y words.)
Listen to music that has no lyrics.
Get a good night's rest. (I know this can be hard, but it does help.)
Change your work environment every now and then.
If you don't feel like writing on a certain day:

Refactor what you have already written.
Create a graph of your results.
Take a break. (Many times I was able to clear my head while walking away from the computer.)

Most of all keep in mind that what you write down is probably going to be modified, changed, added to, moved, or removed many times.  Celebrate your successes, and let your failures educate you.

I had the same anxieties that you are having when I was writing my thesis. Many of my peers had the same struggles well. I would say this is a normal part of the process.


When is it wrong to look at previous exams? It is clear that if I study for an exam in 2014, then it should be okay to look at previous exams from the previous semester of 2014, exams from 2013, 2012, etc.

First question: Is it wrong, however, to look at previous exams within the same semester?

Example:

Let's say there are two classes (9:30-10:30 MWF and 12-1:30 TTh) for a subject (S101). Say I am in the TTh class and I have a friend in the MWF class. My friend takes the S101 exam on Monday. I am to take the S101 exam on Tuesday.

Is it wrong for my friend and I to discuss the S101 exam after e takes the S101 exam and before I take the S101 exam?

Here is what I am thinking:

It should NOT be wrong because the S101 exam on Tuesday should be different from the S101 exam on Monday since professors should expect that students will discuss it among themselves. If the professor makes identical exams, then this is unfair to the MWF class who do not have as much information as the TTh class who easily obtain information from the ones in the MWF class who tell them.

See possibly related question.

Second question:

Some of my friends say it is cheating while others do not. Our "Code of Academic Integrity" handbook makes no mention of such behavior or perhaps I misread it.

If the CoAI in fact fails to mention it while doing such is wrong, can students be faulted for doing such?

A major principle of academic integrity is when in doubt, ask the professor.  Academic integrity codes cannot cover all possible cases, and it's expected that all parties will act reasonably and request clarification when it is needed.  You should not assume that "everything not explicitly forbidden is permitted", nor that "it is easier to ask forgiveness than permission."  The answer to your second question is absolutely yes.

The case you describe in your first question is sufficiently questionable that I don't think you should proceed without explicitly checking.  There is certainly the potential for this to be unfair to the Monday students who don't have the option of talking to anyone before taking the exam.  If several of your friends consider that this may be cheating, that's a clear warning sign.

There are a few possibilities:

The professor hasn't thought of this issue.
The professor has thought of it, and doesn't want students to do it, but is afraid that mentioning it will only encourage students who wouldn't otherwise have thought of it.
The professor has thought of it, but thinks it goes without saying that this is inappropriate.
The professor has thought of it, and has taken other steps to ensure that students can discuss the exam without inequity (e.g. giving completely different exams).

In case 1, it would be inappropriate for you to take advantage of the professor's oversight.  If you ask her about it, you might suggest that she make a policy and announce it explicitly.

Case 2 is perhaps a questionable decision on the professor's part, but in any case, by asking, you protect yourself from inadvertently running afoul of integrity rules.  See also Case 3.

In Case 3, you also protect yourself by asking.  Note that the university bodies that enforce academic integrity codes usually have no problem prosecuting students for doing things that they consider "obviously" inappropriate, even if no written rules explicitly forbid them.  And since they are usually composed in large part of professors, they are likely to have a similar sense of what is "obvious" to your professor.

In case 4, when you ask, you'll be told to go right ahead.

My own practice in such cases is to write on the Monday exam "You may not discuss this exam with anyone, not even to say whether it was easy or hard, until Tuesday at 1:30".  (In some cases I might weaken this to "anyone who has not yet taken it".)  I do this even if the exams will be significantly different, partly because I feel that any differential in available information is a potential inequity, and partly so as not to tip my hand as to whether the exams will be similar or not.  But as I said, you should not interpret the absence of such a warning as permission.


How to fruitfully utilize faculty-student orientation sessions at institutes you don't want to attend? More than once, I have had (graduate school admissions) orientation sessions where the faculty of the institute introduce their fields, their research and what they expect from potential students (Among other things).

At places I am interested in, this is a useful exercise. However, there are often places which I don't wish to study at but have a few good professors doing some really good work with great knowledge of the field and awesome intuition.

How does one fully exploit an opportunity to interact with good professors from institutes you are not interested in attending?

This is very different from a research conference for obvious reasons.

Further,

If I am not interested in that institute but wanted the opinion of one of the professors about another institute/lab (the ones I am interested in attending), is that a taboo?
How does one stay in touch with such contacts where your only excuse to mail is to ask a question? I really want to be on email terms. I have read and understood their work but what is it that should be the content of mails written to them? It doesn't make sense to simply send them emails saying that I read your paper or I attended your talk.

(Please feel free to edit this question in any amount if necessary)

I don't think you can expect to get the opinion of a professor about another institute/lab. You can probably get some facts (like this other institute has more/less money, they are more/less active in this area), but nothing subjective. Academia is pretty small world, and people try as much as possible not to say anything negative publicly (and since everything said is positive, it can be hard to distinguish the real positive from the fake one).
You need to have a real interest in their work. As mentioned here, it's already pretty hard to maintain collaboration between people interested, so if there is no clear interest, it will very hard to be on email terms. But, the question is: why do you want to be on email terms?
See the previous point. You need to really interested, meaning you've read and understood their papers, and are able to ask questions that go beyond "what are the possible usage of your approach?".

As a general remark, professors are usually already very busy dealing with their own research/teaching/students. Of course, they usually are open to new collaborations, but they might lack the time to work with a student who is not theirs. A good solution could to try to visit them, academically speaking, for a month or so, to work on a very specific topic.


how to present a talk on work in preparation I guess this is very common, to do a presentation to your lab. I wonder how I can cite in my slides that the presented work will be part of a future paper.

I remember to see in past presentations a footnote with " Author A & Author B (in preparation)", but I am not sure.

or I should forget all this and just present the work?

If the work corresponds to a paper submitted to a conference, I put in the slides "submitted to conference X". Otherwise, you can put "ongoing work with Author B". If you present the work in part of a seminar, you can put "Seminar of the department X".

But mainly, you don't have to put anything, especially if the slides are not put on the web or distributed. The only important point I would say, is to indicate if your work has been done with other people, in which case, you can write "Joint work with B".


Letter of recommendation from a deceased advisor A PhD advisor usually sent all his letters of recommendation for his students through his secretary. He wrote a letter for his PhD student who is currently applying for academic positions, and unexpectedly died a month after. The secretary has a letter. Should this letter be submitted as a part of application? Should it be stated in the cover letter that the letter is from a deceased advisor and how the submission should be handled (for example, for MathJobs should an account with the secretary email be created)?

The advisor worked in the US and the applicant is considering both American and European universities.

I can't think of a reason why it should not be sent. The professor wrote it, his (untimely) passing shouldn't affect its being sent out. It may be a good idea to have the secretary include a note that this was written prior to the professor's passing, simply to avoid any questions of someone else writing it.

If you have specific requirements for the job process (I'm not familiar with MathJobs), contact the site and/or the places where you're applying. While unusual, this isn't that uncommon, and any respectable program should be willing to work with you on this.


Does it make sense to get a second M.Sc. while pursuing a PhD? The situation: You did your B.Sc. and M.Sc. in CS with focus on subfield X1 and are now pursuing a PhD in subfield X2. There is a Masters program in subfield X2 available where you do your PhD that offers courses that allow you to advance in this subfield (which is pretty new to you).

Does it make sense to get a second M.Sc. while pursuing a PhD if the courses of the Masters program will be beneficial to your PhD work?
Subquestion: Do you think it is even feasible to do this based on your experience?

The geographic context is Europe/Germany so a PhD does not include course work. A Masters (at a university of applied sciences) takes 3 semesters full time with the possibility to double that time when doing it part time.

In Germany, as has already been pointed out, the Master's degree is a prerequisite for enrolling in PhD "studies." It should also be pointed out that in the German system, PhD students are Wissenschaftliche Mitarbeiter (research employees), so it is expected that they would devote all of their time to research activities. Enrolling in a second master's program would run contrary to those expectations, unless you are only a part-time employee (and receive a correspondingly reduced salary). That said, it is possible to sit in on additional classes as a listener. (And generally this is required if you are coming from a foreign country!)


In U.S., why do many engineering departments care about professional engineer registration? I have seen many engineering departments want professional engineer registration. Why do they care?

There are 2 major theories about credentials: human capital theory and signaling theory. Under HCT, a license (such as a PE) shows that you have accumulated a credible amount of knowledge (you must graduate from an accredited engineering school) and experience (you need to have worked for 4 years after your bachelors to sit for the PE exam). Under signalling theory, the PE shows that you have done what it takes to legally call yourself an engineer.  One interesting comparison of the differences of HCT and ST is The Career Consequences of Failing versus Forgetting. You may know just as much as another person, but the one of you that passes some hurdle signals to prospective employers that the hurdle passer is the better candidate. This is because hiring a person is trying to predict future behavior/success with limited information, and many people use signals as heuristics.

You will also find out that universities hire people who have degrees. A cynical view is that they have a vested interest in maintaining the supply of people who get degrees. A signalling theory viewpoint is that universities think degrees are important enough that they only hire teachers who have them.

In many fields of engineering, your working career will be very short if you do not pass your PE. Civil is one such. Other engineering fields, such as Electrical (which is mine), typically have state exemptions for manufacturing, so very few EEs take their PE. When I was younger, I was quite opposed to licensure. Now, I see it as a way to distinguish myself from other candidates. One interesting blog post that inspired me to sit for my PE exam is this one. Another is a dissertation (which is not online) titled "Hiring and Inequality in Elite Professional Service Firms".

My advice is to take your EIT and PE exams as soon as practical. Some US universities require you to take your EIT exam during your senior year (as in they won't issue your diploma without passing it).

Disclaimer: I am registered to take the PE exam this April.


How does the US plan to avoid research falling into Chinese hands work? U.S. doubles down on protecting university research from China
Apparently the US is taking action to "prevent sensitive technology from being stolen by the Chinese military". The article doesn't go into many details of what that action is, but it does say:

The NSCAI [National Security Commission on Artificial Intelligence] recommendations would require more disclosure on research funding and partnerships at universities. It also proposes creating a database of individuals and entities to flag risks in advance.

How does this plan work? In principle everyone is a security risk, since everyone can defect or seek to immigrate to China. Even if we neglect defections/immigration, unless US universities stop admitting Chinese students or exclude Chinese postdocs/visiting researchers entirely, they could always take their knowledge back with them. Checking the source of resource funding and partnerships doesn't seem effective either - one could always change funding sources or partnerships after the PhD/postdoc etc is over.

The nominal goal is to keep people from running two labs, using US funding to develop ideas that then get teleported to the china lab for commercialization. The guys indicted so far were all running labs in China they didn't disclose.
Like charles lieber, who seems to have run a china lab.
It also looks like they're going after people for not filing fbars, which is kinda shitty since half the green card holders in the US are probably guilty of that.
Is this a real problem? Probably not. But it sounds good if you aren't an academic. Same way "tough on crime" always works.


Is it possible to work full time in an industry position while on sabbatical? The standard situation in US research universities is for the university to pay one semester of salary for a year of sabbatical leave, and faculty typically take this sabbatical at another university or research lab, where there is a clear sense of how to fund the sabbatical.

I'm interested to know whether anyone has experience on how to (ethically) fund an industry sabbatical.  Specifically:

Is it possible to work full time in an industry position?  If so, do you get half-pay?  Half-hours?
What (ethical) obligations do you have to ongoing grants (say from the National Science Foundation) during such a sabbatical year?
What (ethical) obligations do you have towards the university that is paying a semester of salary?

Every university has a policy for addressing these matters, and it is best that you obtain the specific policy from your own institution -- a general survey of what goes on at other places will likely not be informative to your present situation.  Federal funding sometimes can be used to cover the other part of your salary -- but, again, it depends on the funding source and the rules of your institution.


Is it okay to include a graduated phd student as a reference in resume/C.V? I'm trying to apply for a PhD and want to include references in my resume. Is it okay to include a PhD student, one who has gotten a degree and has worked in our lab,and is currently working in industry, as a reference?

Yes, they can, but consider whether they're the best choice:
A referee needs to be your champion. A lab mate who you've never worked with probably can't do that, because they don't have a working relationship with you. Someone you've worked with can. (It's unclear which case applies here.)
Senior referees carry more clout than junior referees, so that's something to keep in mind.
Having referees from both industry and academia can be useful—it depends who the recipient is: A theoretician will surely be less interested in a referee from industry than someone more applied.


Is mild credential embellishment from industry considered academic dishonesty? One of my coworkers has a part-time academic/research position at a major university where they supervise PhD students and postdocs even though they do not have an advanced degree, or a degree related to the field where they are working.

Their listed credentials on their profile prominently include two groups affiliated with our company and they are listed as a 'founder' or 'co-founder/lead' on both. This is probably an embellishment of their role, which was mostly junior, but with a fair amount of administrative/coordination work. They also changed the name of one of the groups (which is internal to the company so not noticeable by someone outside it) to sound more broad than it actually is.

Technically I could see an argument for either title since the terms are kind of vague--'founder' since they were one of the members when each group was started, and 'lead' since they did some coordination work. But the overall role did not involve technical, thought, or academic leadership and this is hard to describe without revealing internal company information. I am concerned that they are passing themselves off as a thought leader in this (emerging) field, but wonder if my concern is overblown.

Is this considered 'academic dishonesty', or 'unethical'? Or is this normal for people coming from industry (as opposed to a direct academic pipeline where one is a grad student, then a postdoc, then an assistant professor, etc.)

I find it unlikely that your colleague got their academic assignment based on the role in the company. It is more likely that their contributions/research/innovation/pedagogic ability was recognized and they were offered the opportunity.

Don't generally assume that an advanced degree is an absolute prerequisite for academic affiliation. I know a guy who doesn't hold a PhD yet is the director of a major research lab at a prestigious private research university in the US. He simply "never got around to it". True and extraordinary merit is still recognized in academia, advanced degrees are just another (arguably easier) contribution to that merit.

That being said, I wouldn't call that academic dishonesty and embellishment is also a strong word for it. This could be labelled as inflation, because, as you said, their stated position is a bit 'stretched'. Unfortunately, such things are seen quite often, people feel the need to stress their influence and position. However, for the world outside your company, the distinction makes little difference, and for people who care within, your colleague either doesn't care or can plausibly defend the vague statements. From the standpoint of ethics, this falls arguably into a gray zone, where it is understood that it is not ethical, yet it is tolerated, as long as the stretch isn't blatant.


How to Properly Cite Linux Source Code? I know, the question of how to cite source code has been asked before, but I did not found anything helpful for my specific situation.

I am currently writing my master's thesis. My university does not dictate any particular citation style so I just use biblatex's default settings. My work is quite OS-specific, so I have to cite Linux source code on several places throughout.

I found the Linux cross reference, which allows me to reference specific code lines for specific Linux versions. I intent to use this for my purpose, so I will cite URLs in the form of http://lxr.free-electrons.com/source/<filepath>?v=<version>#L<linenumber>. However, I do not know how to exactly do this.

I know biblatex provides the online type which should be generally applicable, since I am citing URLs. I have two problems with this, though:

What do I fill in as the author/editor? Linux is written by hundreds of people and surely there would be no benefit in mentioning them all. Should I drop the editor/author and instead fill in the organization? But then, do I refer to the Free Software Foundation holding the copyright to Linux Linux Foundation or rather to the maintainers of the Linux cross reference?
I feel like a larger amount of such source code references would clutter the bibliography. Hence, I would rather have an extra section (like a secondary bibliography) listing only those source code references. Is there a solution for this use case? Or should I save the effort and accept the cluttering?

In my mind, I see the Linux source code as a single bibliography entry (possibly with its official kernel.org repository as the source URL). You can refer to the different files in the text as \cite[Version~4.1, \texttt{drivers/android/binder.c}, Line~18]{Linux}.

EDIT: suggested kernel.org instead of github, as pointed out by bdsl, sebleblanc and Bruno.


How to Cite Hardware in Scientific Articles? I am writing a scientific article. In the "materials and methods" section I must specify the hardware I used, namely an HP Pavilion dv6 Notebook PC (I also specified the details of its features).

Now my doubt:

Should I use bibliographic citations (such as when mentioning a software, book, or scientific article) when I mention the hardware?

What is standard (if any) for such cases?

Thanks in advance for any help and/or suggestion.

P.S.
I use APA standards for bibliographic references, although the question is independent of that subject.

There is a line to be drawn regarding which things that you used get to be cited.

What deserves to be cited/mentioned?

The experimental hardware? A mention definitely, but a bibliography entry--probably not.
The PC you conducted measurements on? If the PC specs are relevant, yes. Again, why would you need to add a bibliography entry for that? If it is specifically mentioned that hardware need to be specified, then supply basic information like: Desktop PC with Intel Core i7 Processor (4x 2.0 GHz) and 4 GB DDR4 RAM.
The digital camera you took pictures with? Nobody mentions that.
Edit: Apparently, sometimes people do, as salehgeek pointed out in his comment. As for the other points, I was talking about my field (engineering). I have never seen anyone mention the camera they photographed their samples with, but some may do that. Personally, I find it superfluous.
The software you used for processing the results? If it does something special (e.g. a simulation tool) yes, but nobody cites Word, Excel or LaTeX in their papers.

In my field (engineering) the machines get mentioned in the experimental part (manufacturer, model). Sometimes exact settings on the machine are provided. Instruction manuals, manufacturer documents/websites are almost never in the bibliography.

The best way for you to know what is accepted is to read related articles and see what the majority does. If it fits with your journal's guidelines, do that.


What is the standard way to refer to shared code in conference papers? Say I have a github repository with the shared code and data used for that conference paper? What is the standard way to refer to it in the paper itself?

Write something like. The code is available in [5], and then give the linkas a reference?
Give the link in the paper text itself?
Give the link as footnotes?
Not mention the link in the paper itself, but send it separately as part of the submission?

I have seen all of 1-3 in papers. I would favor a link in the text or footnotes over a link in the references, to underline that the code is part of the contribution of the paper. (If it isn't, e.g. because it was already presented in one of your previous papers, or because someone not on the authors list wrote a significant portion of the code, put it in the references instead.)

Definitely mention the link in the paper itself, so that readers of the paper can look it up. Also, for convenience, it's nice if the URL is a clickable link in the PDF.


How to stay calm when receiving review notifications? I've been in academia for roughly 8 years now. Wrote quite a few papers. Still, my heart starts seriously racing each time there's an email notifying me of a review for one of my papers.
Does anyone have any good tips on how to be less stressed out about this?

I've been in Stack Exchange for roughly 5 years now. Wrote quite a few questions and answers. Still, my heart pumps each time there's a notification of a comment for one of my posts.

No, I don't think you can escape from the fear of being rejected for something you emotionally invest into it. As long as it doesn't affect your health, you may want to feel relax when it's come.

Acknowledge your fear, and tell yourself that that fear is not scary may reduce the stress of not being able to control your fear. The fear from the notification is unavoidable, but the stress from not being able to control your fear is a secondary stress that you can control. Take a breath. Accept the fear.

If anything, I suggest you to practice mindfulness. It's a technique to not being overwhelmed by our emotions, and has been recognized as an effective way to reduce stress. It has been used in many programs and therapies for stressful people.

Source:
• Germer, C.K., R.D. Siegel, and P.R. Fulton, Mindfulness and Psychotherapy (Guilford Publications, 2005)
• Hofmann, S.G., An Introduction to Modern CBT: Psychological Solutions to Mental Health Problems (Wiley, 2011)


Can I use an online university credit for grad school admission? I'm thinking of applying to grad school but it requires multivariable calculus and linear algebra which i did not take during my undergraduate years.

Would an online course (credit earning, such as this one) count towards this application requirement?

This sort of question can only be answered by the institution you apply to. It might require an exception to established rules, and that might be available or not. But it would probably require a person make a decision. If you try to use such a course, you probably need to give a good description of it and also something about how you interacted with it and any measurable outcome.

If you haven't taken the course yet and are just wondering whether you should, then get advice first from the school(s) you want to apply to so that you know in advance what will happen. If they discourage it, they may have alternatives that will work for you and for them.

If you have taken the course, then you can ask, providing the needed information.


Applying for international graduate school without any prior collaboration with researchers at the new location I'm finishing my Master's degree in my home country in March of 2022. I've just finished my first year of Master. I have no publications or results yet, but my work is going according to plans and is very promising. Results will come. My current GPA is 3.78/4.00. My undergraduate GPA is 2.68/4.00.
I'm currently looking forward to some Ph.D. programs in some universities in Canada, the United States of America and Germany. I'm looking mostly for programs that have a recent publication impact in my field of research (Geometry Processing), which isn't a very strong field in my home country.
Unfortunately, my advisors do not have contact with any international researchers in my area for collaboration (they are new in this area too). They say it would be a better idea if I had some collaboration experience before my applications and aren't encouraging me to apply without previous experience.
But I want to apply for international Ph.D. programs. I'm already preparing myself for proficiency in English tests. I'm totally dependent on scholarships and grants to be able to finish any Ph.D. program. Submissions are probably going to start around September/October.
My question is: how should I write an admission letter without any prior experience with professors, researchers, etc. at the university I'm applying to? All I have by now is access to the publications of the professors I'd like to be my advisors. That's the origin of my interest. Should I approach these professors someway before my application? If so, how should I approach them?
Also: I'm an LGBT girl and will be a first-time immigrant. How to express my concerns about financial and psychological support during my Ph.D. while writing for the professors?
This is super new for me and I don't have much external support right now. I'd appreciate any help or advice.

There are a huge number of questions on this site about how to contact potential PhD supervisors. Generally the advice is:

Before contacting anyone, make sure you understand how PhD admissions typically work in the country you are interested in. Who makes the decision? Do you apply for a specific project, or for a generic graduate programme? Where does the money come from?
Be brief. Professors are busy people. Don't give them a wall of text and 17 attachments to read.
Have clear questions, and ask them clearly. Good starting points are: (i) Are you interested in taking on a student to start in September 2023 [optional: in the general field of XYZ]? (ii) If so, what kind of topic would you have in mind? (iii) If I were to apply for funding from XYZ, would you be willing to support that application? Are you aware of any other sources of funding that might be relevant?

Note that you don't have to put absolutely everything into your first email. If someone is genuinely interested in your application, they will be happy to answer one or two sensible follow-up emails. Also note that professors get lots of these emails - some students even (appear to) use automailers to send them to everyone in the world -  and, statistically, most of those people will need to be declined.
Your question mentions specific aspects of support that you may require. I suggest:

Financial support is easy - just make it clear in your email that you have not yet obtained a scholarship.
Immigration - Mention in your email what citizenship(s) you hold; it is often relevant for identifying which sources of funding may be available.
'Psychological' support (I wonder if 'emotional' support may be a better phrase here) - Unless you have a concrete requirement that you need potential advisors to accept, this is probably not something that needs to be addressed in an initial email. Once you have established that the professor is interested in you - and you are interested in what they can offer - you can ask more detailed questions about life in the city/university/etc. This is a good opportunity to gauge their personality and advising style. It is also very normal to ask to be put in touch with current students, who are often better-placed to explain what the experience is like 'on the ground'. Many universities will have societies/associations focussing on LGBT and international students, and these will be able to put you in touch with someone who can address any more specific questions you have.


Mentioning money in statement of purpose I am currently working as a research assistant with a pay grade that is half of a typical entry level commercial job (computer programming jobs in particular).

Is it beneficial to mention this in a Statement of purpose for graduate admissions, so as to show that I sacrificed a better financial situation in favor of a research career? Is mentioning money a bad idea regardless of the context, or is it well known that research assistance-ships pay less than regular jobs?

Actually its well known that research assistance-ships pay less than regular jobs. This is true.

But, I think you should not mention money in the research statement in a blunt way. But you can definitely prove your point in a subtle way:

  Like, After my undergraduate I got multiple offers from multi-national corporations but my passion motivated me to choose a research path over any other.

This is just an example, you can rewrite suiting to your needs.


Is applying for other positions during the early stages of a PhD you don't like considered bad? I've recently started a PhD position in a university and I figured out that many aspects deject me. At the moment I'm employed in a test phase of a few months, and this has led me to think of leaving this position if it didn't fulfil me by then.
With that in mind,

Is it ethical/professional/acceptable to ask my references for additional recommendation letters, again, for the new positions I'm going to apply to?
Is a sign of lack of commitment and interest (and therefore, unprofessional)?

I appreciate your opinions.

PS: Even though I have accepted this position, it never was among my top choices. In fact, my decision was very much affected by the situation of COVID in my country and the market recession.
UPDATE
The main reasons unprofessionalism strikes my mind are the following. I hope it clarifies my situation more.

I'm in the very early days of my PhD, the transient phase so to speak. So any extrapolation of my current situation to the future isn't reliable. I'm afraid that I'm making my mind during this transition time, before adjusting myself or tasting the research as much as I should.

As far as I can feel, the non-academic aspects of my unhappiness outweigh the academic part; For instance, the cold environment of the campus and the city, the depressing atmosphere of the only accommodation I could find, as well as my flatmates (please look at PS2) who are desperately are looking for jobs in the wakes of the pandemic, all transfer a sense of stagnation to me. Although some of these issues can be solved, I believe they need an immense amount energy and time, probably comparable to the effort I need to put on my research.

I accepted this position with one vital side goal in mind, which (to be honest) is as important for me as the PhD degree if not more: learning the local language (until B1 level). Learning a new language is though, especially alongside a PhD. I know it needs extra focus and perseverance. But with all I have to face (summarized in the previous number), and knowing my personal mental capacity, I'm seriously sceptical about being able to achieve this.

I believe these are decent arguments on a personal level, but maybe not academically. I'm afraid that Academic institutes may find this chain of reasoning unsatisfactory, a set of excuses, or a sign of unreliability. As I'm barely a researcher at this point, I'd be grateful if you can shed more light on these arguments and resolve their (lack of) pertinence to the academic world to me, as an experienced outer observer.

PS2: My flatmates are good people. However, I'd rather like to be surrounded by people who are trying to push forward a meaningful protect with passion. That kind of people whose perseverance inspires others. And I'm not talking about superman; For me, any other PhD candidate is a good example of such a group.)

Identifying that you are not happy where you are, honestly attempting to address the reasons and then, if you are still not satisfied, making the decision to leave before you become depressed and wholly negative, is far from unprofessional. Quite the opposite, in fact.
There should be no negative associations from taking a purposeful step away from an unfulfilling working relationship. For that reason, there is no problem for asking for additional recommendation letters from your referees for a different PhD position. They might be curious why the previous position didn't last. Being honest and professional with your reasons is a good policy.
You mention that you are "employed in a test phase" for a few months. Does this mean that you are in some kind of provisional stage of your PhD programme? It is not uncommon for PhD programmes to have some kind of initial provisional period during which both the PhD candidate and their supervisors develop their working relationship. If by the end of the provisional period it emerges that the PhD candidate and the supervision team are a poor fit to each other and/or to the research programme, the PhD registration can be terminated and everyone goes their separate ways.
There is no downside to this, despite many candidates viewing this as "quitting" or feeling that they were at some kind of fault for not making it work. The PhD -- supervisor relationship is just that: a relationship. In addition, there are occasions where it becomes obvious that the research project and/or student and/or supervisor are a poor combination. Normally this would have been avoided during an initial registration period, but sometimes the disconnect(s) are only discovered later in the piece.


Is paraphrasing Jack's sentence considered plagiarism, given I cite the original author Z? I have a specific question. I am working on my academic paper.

I came across this unpublished paper online written by a PhD student. Although, his topic is different, some parts of his paper relates to the background section of mine. For my background section, I am using three different books as source material. This person, let's call him Jack, has also used the same books.

  Question: If my sentences are similar to Jack's (i.e. I reworded parts of his sentences) is it considered plagiarism, given, I cite the original source (that we both used): the books?

Example (made up):

Jack: According to Greene (2001), the program was implemented in 1991 to ensure a more efficient organization of the workers and, subsequently, to facilitate their unionization.
Me: The Unity program was created in 1991 to efficiently organize the labour force and, subsequently, to help workers join the labour union (Greene, 2001)

Some terms are hard to replace with alternatives without fully changing the meaning or using too many words.

I have read the book, the main source material, and have cited it in my sentence. But, my sentence is very similar to Jack's. Would this be considered plagiarism even though the idea is not Jack's?

I have no problem referencing Jack's paper in my Reference section at the end, but I don't want to use intext citation citing Jack's paper.

Plagiarism is the act of passing off another work/writing as your own.

If I read the question right, you are saying something like the following:  you wrote a background section about about works [1], [2] and [3].  Jack also independently and prior to you wrote a summary about works [1], [2] and [3].  And some of your sentences happen to be similar.  This is not plagiarism.  This is normal, because you're talking about the same things, and because both of your descriptions are influenced by the original sources [1], [2] and [3].

What would be plagiarism is if you were to copy large chunks of text into your paper without marking it off as a quotation.  In my field (pure math) it's common that different papers have whole sentences which are virtually identical.  (There must be hundreds of papers with the sentence "Let G be a group.")

I also don't think it's necessarily necessary to cite Jack's work just to say they summarize [1], [2] and [3] also.  If you think looking at Jack's presentation also will help the reader, or you used aspects of Jack's presentation, then you should cite Jack.


Affiliation on a paper written mostly in previous position If research was done and paper was mostly written at institute A, but then it finally got accepted while the author moved to institute B, say, 3 years later. Should the affiliation of the author be

Only Institute A: because 95% of the support was from here, and work was done here
Both Institute A and B: in some sense, both institutes supported the work
Only Institute B: this is where the author is affiliated at the moment

related: Changing affiliation on publication

There are no fixed rules but I would opt for your option (2). The affiliation is intended to aid in facilitating contact with the author but is of course useful to a department to show count the paper as a product from that institute. By listing your former address first indicating that that is where you did most of the work and then adding the second as present address provides the best and useful information for all parts. Option (1) means your present location is not disclosed which is a missed opportunity to locate you. Option (3) has the disadvantage that your former department are not associated with the work you performed there. So although all are acceptable, (2) would be the best (most polite and useful) way in your situation.


fee structure for school management system software i am developing school management software which has many modules, one of them is Student Fees. please share some fee structure so i could add a best of them in my software.
off course i can build software, i just need ideas

Pay per module ( with x modules per course) or pay per course , but no diploma or certificate to be issued until full payment received. also, payment by installments possible.


Unconscious bias toward recommendation letters written by men? This is an attempt to rescue a strongly down-voted question.

Are there any studies investigating possible unconscious gender bias in evaluating recommendation letters?  Specifically, is there any published evidence that recommendation letters with female authors are (or are not) less effective than recommendation letters with male authors?  Studies considering letters for graduate admission, faculty hiring, or promotion and tenure are all relevant.

Let me emphasize that I am not asking about intentional sexism, which I assume is sufficiently rare to be insignificant, but rather unconscious bias.  I am also not asking for anecdotes, but pointers to actual published literature.

Similar studies have revealed significant gender disparity in several related academic contexts, including recommendation letters for male vs. female applicants.  Other examples include:

Applications to lab manager positions
Prospective doctoral students emailing faculty
Judgement of publication quality
Teaching evaluations (See also)
Selection for mathematical tasks (See also)

I couldn't find any recent (written after 2000, that is) study that directly addresses the issue of how the recommender's gender influence how the letter is perceived. However, I did find one interesting survey study (doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2389.2009.00453.x) that asked experts in personnel-related professions how they think about LORs. One item asked them to rate on a scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree) the following statement:

  I believe that applicant, referent, or reader gender may influence how one interprets the contents of LORs

The average response was 2.86 with an SD of 1.22. About 42% strongly agreed, and 43% strongly disagreed. Clearly there is some level of controversy when it comes to the role gender plays in LORs. The study did not, however, ask any question directly about the referent's gender, which makes it even harder to draw any specific conclusion for our purpose here.


Doing masters thesis in another institute Is it possible to do this? If I find a research group/researcher working on something I like and I just want to do my thesis there. Is it necessary that

I have to go there as an exchange student OR
I will have to enroll in their masters program?

I suppose the only way to do what I am asking about it via an exchange program,but is there any other way?

This depends strongly upon what university you're attending now, and where you want to do your research. For instance, in Germany, students are allowed to do a master's thesis anywhere in the world, but they are responsible for organizing this themselves. Other schools and departments in other countries may have more restrictive policies.

An exchange program may or may not be necessary, but this is entirely dependent on the specific policies of both the school you're attending and the school or institute you'd like to do your thesis work at. The best guidance I can give you is to first ask the graduate students' office or "graduate officer" of your current department to ask what the relevant regulations are for your home institute. Then talk to the other institute. Of course, start such a process well in advance of when you want to do the thesis work; a semester at the minimum, a year is more strongly recommended, as it may take several months to organize the required paperwork and visas (if you're planning on traveling abroad to do the thesis).


In teaching, what are the advantages of using slides over doing board work? At my university, most lecturers and professors use slides in teaching. This is true for most engineering, mathematics and science courses. I am more comfortable with doing the board work and then sharing my hand-written lecture notes with the students. From my personal experience, I feel that the latter is a better way of teaching.

So, what are the advantages of using slides? Why do you use slides?

Secondly, does the answer to the above question change if you were teaching graduate students?

I am a student and I much prefer lecturers who write on the board than the ones who use slides.

Profs using slides generally go into loop mode where they have the objective of going through all the slides before the end of the class. As such, profs tend to go in a very fast pace.

Writing on the board brings some dynamism to the lectures. The lecturer tends to pace himself much better, and students are then more encouraged to ask questions as they go along.

Also, having students write notes help them become more active and aware during the lecture.

In my experience I've seen lots of profs who just read the stuff from their slides without elaborating any further. The students then tend to fall asleep since they know the lectures are basically in the slides.

Also, I have the impression that profs using slides are lazier in their teaching, in the sense that they don't even review the slides they are about to present before the lectures.


Looking for sources of online graduate-level education Can anyone suggest sources of online graduate-level education, as well as some criticism of them? Both free and paid are valid. I'm familiar with these sources:

Academic Earth
MIT OpenCourseWare
Kahn Academy
NYU Open Education

and I'm curious to know what other resources are available.

A few points:

What subject are you looking at? The answer varies significantly if you are not looking at science/math/engineering.
Define 'graduate level' because the Khan Academy (Not Kahn) is far from graduate level.
This is a very good link. I'll paste an excerpt here:

  MIT OpenCourseWare : undergraduate and graduate subjects taught at MIT.

  Open Yale Courses : astronomy, biomedical engineering, history, economics, English, philosophy, physics, political science, and
  psychology.

  UC Berkeley Webcast : biology, computer science, electrical engineering, physics, political science, and psychology.

  Stanford Engineering Everywhere

  NPTEL basic undergraduate science and engineering courses. The courses include biotechnology, civil engineering, computer science,
  electrical engineering, electronics and communication, and mechanical
  engineering.

  McGill Univ. COurses OnLine (COOL) : chemistry, biology and computer science.

  UCLA BruinCast offers some free audio/video lectures for certain undergraduate courses from the University of California, Los Angeles
  (UCLA).

  Open Learning Initiative | Harvard University Extension School brings free audio/video lectures on topics in computer science,
  English literature, history, and mathematics.

  Video & Audio | University of Cambridge offers free access to audio and video lectures from the University's institutions including
  the Isaac Newton Institute for Mathematical Sciences and the
  Department of Materials Science and Metallurgy.

  Podcasts from the University of Oxford provides free access to certain course materials and audio/video lectures on a variety of
  subjects, including chemistry, engineering, humanities, life science,
  medical sciences, physics, and social sciences.

  YouTube - UHouston's Channel (University of Houston) contains lots of video lectures on various subjects: anthropology, chemistry,
  English literature, history, philosophy, and psychology.

  nanoHUB Courses contains free educational materials about nanotechnology. The courses cover the following subjects:
  nanoelectronics, NEMS/nanofluidics, nanomedicine/biology, and
  nanophotonics.

  Mathematical Sciences Research Institute (MSRI) provides a large number of free video lectures on a variety of subjects in mathematics
  and mathematical sciences.

  CERN Document Server provides a huge collection of text documents and video lectures in particle physics and related areas.

  Department of Mathematics, University of Colorado at Colorado Springs offers free video lectures on mathematics including
  calculus, discrete mathematics, linear algebra, differential equations
  and mathematical statistics. Registration is required to access the
  lectures.

  Indiana Multimedia Distribution System offers free audio/video courses and lectures in business and management from Kelley School of
  Business, Indiana University Bloomington.

The pasted website has links to all the places, alternately, you could simply google the words in bold.


I am reading a paper that I barely understand. How can I make the best of my mentor in this situation? Half of my inability to understand the paper comes from not being acquainted with the folklore of this particular part of the field, and the other half might be because I am lacking general background knowledge. I cannot just go to my mentor asking them to fill in every single step I am missing. I am also sure they can put things in perspective, or just say something illuminating.

What kinds of questions are reasonable in this case?

Jumping in to a new sub field can be hard. The vocabulary is new and you don't yet have the insights of those with more experience.

If you trust your advisor, you could just say what you say here, but ask for the important background papers (or books) that will help bring you up to speed quickly. This is what a colleague would do, so it isn't impossible for a student as well.

As Patricia Shanahan suggests in the the comment, a typical way is to go back through a chain of references until you come to things you understand and then work forward again. This is hard and time consuming of course. It also implies access to a good library (and a good librarian).

But one way to attack the problem is to write down your questions about the paper as they arise. I'd suggest using index cards for this. One question per card. This leaves space for you to supply answers (or references to answers) as you come across them and your understanding improves.

Those cards, once you whittle them down to a reasonable number, can be used both for research (searches, say) and for a conversation with your advisor. Getting answers to a few key questions might let you fill in the rest.

Everyone starts out knowing nothing. In math, insight into some things may help give insight into others, but it isn't guaranteed.


Mathematics Stack Exchange as an indicator for academic career I'm due to start my PhD in Pure Mathematics next month, fully funded by a scholarship, at an average university, I'll be specialising in combinatorial group theory, and I have a strong First in Mathematics from a Russell group university. My goal is to become an academic.

This is my Mathematics Stack Exchange (MSE) profile. I've been an active user since 2013, visiting pretty much daily, but my reputation is currently just 5,760 and I haven't used MathOverflow at all (as the questions there every time I visit, which isn't that often, are beyond me). This seems quite low. Should this worry me?

To what extent is MSE reputation an indication of potential in academia?

The only thing that a high MSE or MO reputation indicates is that a person spends too much time on the internet (and I say that as someone with a reasonably high reputation on MO).  I don't think you should take it seriously as a data point on how successful you are likely to be.

On a related note, it also doesn't play any role in things like hiring decisions.  At all the places I've worked, someone would be ridiculed if they brought up MO or MSE reputation at a hiring meeting.

It's just recreation.


Is it justifiable to closely mimic the structure/organisation of another thesis for your own thesis I am currently in the process of writing my masters thesis. During my research I found this another thesis and I really like the way it is organised and structured.

By structure, I mean the heading titles, the organisation of results and their order etc, for one chapter only. Although the topic of both thesis are similar but I will be presenting my own original data and results in the thesis.

Would it be ok for me to closely copy the structure of another thesis or could that be seen as plagiarism?

Generally, as the purpose of the thesis is to convey information and as you are not plagiarizing the content, it should be fine to follow the organizational structure of another work, especially if it serves that purpose.

After all, most publications encourage or enforce some kind of organizational or structural guidelines in their papers.


Master degree and PhD in biomathematics The following question was posted on Math SE, but seems to be more related to Academia SE:

Next year I will start studying maths at university. I'm highly interested in biomathematics, but in my country there aren't specific courses for students. At least there are very few Ph.D. programs. So I'm thinking of taking a 3-years degree course here and then a Master degree and Ph.D. in another country. Are there such courses in UK or US? If so, which are the entry requirements (in terms of, say, English language certificates, couses taken, etc)? How can I prepare to such courses? Are there any suggested readings?

Yes there are MSc as well as PhD programs in Biomathematics. You should look for programs in Biomathematics and/or Mathematical Biology; this field of study is also branded as Systems Biology quite often. A quick Google search returns quite a few hits both in UK and US. The Society for Mathematical Biology has a good (but I would say somewhat US-centric) list of such programs available here.

Entry requirements usually depend on the program. Generally speaking good Maths and Stats (eg. Network/Graph Theory, Stochastics, PDEs) help a lot, as well as showing an interdisciplinary approach to your training. My best advice to prepare for such a course would be to be a great student. It is too early in your academic journey to focus exclusive in one area (eg. Stochastic Processes) and hope it will carry you through graduate school. Besides it will be very unlikely that a star-pupil in Maths will be denied entry to a graduate Biomathematics programme.


Stuck with a mediocre topic for my master thesis I am a masters student in Germany.
On the contrary to how most people's thesis work turns out, mine looks like it is quite far from what I planned to gain expertise in, in that it seems like it is an oversimplified topic. I was looking to work with machine learning as a center point of focus ( did a bunch of courses in data mining, information retrieval) , but after working as an intern for nearly 5 months in the institute, the topic I was offered was to do with optimising pairwise intersections of lists for which I do not need to make use of any machine learning tools.

I am afraid, this will make it very difficult for me to get a job in the industry and also, I feel like, the topic is not really giving me much to write as part of the literature survey in my thesis report. The whole thing has gotten me really worried sick.

I would greatly appreciate any guidance on where I stand and what I should look out for.

An emplyer won’t necessarily be concerned with the topic of the thesis but how you functioned and completed it.

Most employers look for capability and capacity...


Does getting awarded your PhD in physics depend on the quality of university? Say you wrote a good thesis on some discovery you made in physics.

If it was a mediocre discovery, nothing special, are you more likely to get awarded the PhD at a 'not very good' university than at a top class university like Cambridge?

The quality of the university and the quality of the theses produced are not perfectly correlated. You are just as likely to end up with a "nothing special" thesis at a Cambridge as at a Random State University. The criterion for awarding a PhD is the completion of an independent and original contribution to the field of knowledge one is studying. There is no requirement that it be "groundbreaking."

That said, given that the "top" universities also tend to have superior resources available to students, the likelihood that a "nothing special" thesis will be accepted by the advisor as suitable for a PhD thesis is also somewhat mitigated as a result.


Do you include references in your CV? Some people do not list references/referees at the end of their CV, and simply quote references are available on request. This is more convenient to me for two reasons:

Normally, no reference is contacted without permission, so, it is not necessary to be included in the CV.
Depending on the purpose (application, proposal), you may want to introduce other references (more relevant to that application). This is the reason that some job applications need separate list of references.

On the other hand, including famous persons as references shows your connections and background. In addition, the audience might be suspicious why hiding possible references!

Which one is preferred and more reasonable?

In my opinion references are transient. I would expect anybody asking for my reference to do so for each time the reference is requested. the reason is that I would want to know for what I am providing reference and also because I am keen to make the decision to be a reference under my own control.

Hence, i see no reason to provide references in a CV in some permanent way. For each occassion the CV will be used it will of course be possible to add names to the CV but then only for one-time use. It is after all not complicated to edit the CV.

To add a line "references are available on request" would be a big no-no for me (this applies to all aspects of, for example, an application, not just the CV). If you have an application, it should be complete and provide all material and information you want in support unless the application makes it clear some information should be added upon request.


Publish a paper of my master thesis I finished my master thesis in a high ranking university. The thesis idea is simple and not novel, however the results are higher that the state of art.
My supervisor is one of the top in the field. When I asked him to try to publish a paper of my work, he refused and he said the work should be "novel".
I am pretty sure that he is addressing TOP conferences and journals only. But, what I think is publish the paper in middle-tier conference or even workshop, so I can boost my profile.
Is it possible to submit it without adding his name?

Any ideas or advices?

If your supervisor is one of the top people in the field and doesn't think the work merits publication, I would heed his advice. Furthermore, publishing work without his consent that he has helped you with (even if you don't include his name) is a very bad idea. Why don't you talk to your supervisor again and ask him his opinion on publishing in a lower-tier journal?


How many marks should I take off for a student using an incorrect value? I am marking tests and a student wrote down 64 instead of -64 for one of the questions. This obviously changed the entire question and they would have gotten full marks otherwise, (i.e. all their steps are correct). They also did really well on the rest of the test. I do not know how much I should penalize them since full marks on this question would give them 87%, and anything lower would be an <85% mark. Even half marks would drop their mark to as low as 60%. How many marks would you penalize them?

Marks are a measurement of how well the student knows the subject. So it depends on how much of a lack of knowledge that mistake represents:

in most cases, if all steps are correct and only a number was copied wrongly, then obviously the knowledge of the subject is very good, and most of the question was done correctly, so "almost full marks" are deserved

if the mistake shows lack of knowledge (for example, if that "-64" is a value of power, which can only be positive, or if it leads to an obviously unphysical result that the student should have noticed), then one might remove more marks.

a tricky case is if the mistake leads to the problem being much easier to solve (e. g. "Write the last 10 digits of 2^(64+x)"), and it is correctly solved. In this case, it would be unfair to give full marks, as the student did not show much knowledge of the subject. Unfortunately, this should probably result in no marks.

It seems like your case falls in the first category, so I would see no reason to give anything less than "the highest mark that is not a full mark".


Submit an academic paper to arXiv built over a patented idea We have our idea patented with the company we are working currently for. But, we have also been writing a paper draft on the theory and the mathematics behind the idea with practical results, plots, comments, and future directions. Can we submit the paper to arXiv linking it to the original patent? I am confused because arXiv is for open publishing but having the core idea patented doesn't, probably, allow open usage of the algorithm. Does it then contain the same academic value and worth putting on arXiv? Does arXiv allow such a thing at all? Thanks

To the best of my knowledge, arXiv has no rules against posting preprints that discuss patented material.  The only requirement is that you grant them a license in the copyright of the text you posted, so that they can distribute the article without having you sue them.  They have no such strict "open publishing" rules as you suggest.

However, in many jurisdictions, if you publish your invention (i.e. make it public in any way) before applying for the patent (or maybe before having it granted?), your patent can be invalidated.  Thus, you should consult with your patent attorney before publishing anything.


PhD Application (in Australia): no confirmation email I have applied (on February 17th 2020, GMT +1) for a PhD position (in Australia) starting the latest in July (so, no application deadline). It has now (March 7th 2020) been nearly three weeks ago since I emailed my application. I did not receive any confirmation email of receipt from the professor. It is something I really loathe, because I do not know what the status of my application is. Contrary, I can image that reading applications and making inquiries with the funding organisation in respect to the applications can take up a lot of time. Thus, I do not want to appear impatient. I wonder, however, if further patience is prudent. In short, should I email the professor about the status of my application or should I wait a few more weeks?

Thanks!

It is fair to enquire about the status of the application. If it is done via direct email to the professor, which is rare, there may well be no confirmation. The people involved will email if the application is to progress further.

If you are interested in a PhD, take a look at www.jobs.ac.uk. There are many thousands of PhD places on there across Europe to apply for.
There is a huge amount of funding for this academic stage, not necessarily requiring the best marks, which may seem surprising but it is true. There are also equivalent sites in other regions.

Also, there is no reason to assume you are not still in consideration. I once emailed and it took more than two months to receive an interview offer. Besides this, it regularly takes many applications before one of them comes back with an offer of an interview.


How to follow up with a master's advisor who abandoned me? I was recently awarded my master's degree. This was a very difficult process since my master's thesis advisor completely abandoned me halfway through. She literally did not answer my e-mails . No -one in my institute was specialized in the branch I wanted to write thesis so , I wrote to a professor of another institute in my country and she agreed . I visited her institute for 7 days in January , 2020 and she gave me a research paper to study . After completely understanding the paper in mid February , when I emailed her on how I should proceed she didn't replied .  I e-mailed her 4-5 times in February-March and got no reply.I ended up finishing the work on my own and the committee approved my thesis without her involvement.( but didn't evaluated thesis of any student due to pendamic( thesis were not even asked for submission, the evaluation was done on the basis of presentation done in mid february) More details in my previous post.
My concern is that no one has reviewed my thesis. One other professor gave very generic comments (grammar) and simply said I wrote a nice thesis. I want to apply to PhD positions in Europe, so I think my thesis should be carefully reviewed by an expert before I apply.
Question: How can I get my (former) advisor to review my thesis?   . Should I write in email that a this was not expected  as she had said yes to me and even I visited her institute  and  I was left for thesis without any advisor?
Or there should not be any complaints in e-mail and I should just request her ?
Do writing these things and expressing my displeasure will further diminish chances of her replying to my e-mail . But certainly due to her I went through very much anxiety and had to spend a lot more of time on project by myself ( and whose output is till not known although I tried to give my best ). I am sure she was not suffering through covid-19 and I saw her name as one of the speakers at  various seminars taking place in my country amid pandemic( at different points of time).
She didn't replied. It is a weird thing how professors wield such great power in Academia that students can't do anything.

This is a peculiar situation. Your supervisor did not honor your agreement, but at this point she has nothing to gain from continuing to be involved with your thesis, and being angry about that isn't going to help you in any way. Realistically, do not expect any more input from her, and move on.
Getting someone else to look at your thesis could be useful, but keep in mind that you are asking someone to put in a couple days of work for nothing in return. Try to find someone who could be at least slightly interested in this, and see what you can do to minimize the effort for them. Maybe approach a lecturer whose class you took during your degree, or enroll in a new course if you think that you have burned bridges in that university? Search around if there is some other researcher, even elsewhere in the world, who has published on a similar topic -- in particular, someone early in their career might be more excited to help.
Even then, clean up the writing as much as you can by yourself, maybe send them just the key proofs, and ask targeted questions -- in other words, approach this always keeping in mind that you are asking for a favor -- and you are more likely to get a reply.


Is it true that M.Eng. is considered an undergraduate degree in the UK? If so, why? It is surprising to see from these sources (Wikipedia and University of Edinburgh) that the Master of Engineering (M.Eng.) degree is actually an undergraduate degree in the UK. It is recalled as an 'undergraduate masters degree'. While only PhD MSc and MPhil are considered to be postgraduate degrees.

How far is this true? Why is it so?

It is considered an undergraduate degree because no degree is required in order to start the degree. Undergraduate masters degrees are increasingly common in the UK, due to the funding system. Postgraduate taught degrees are not currently eligible for government funding, so an integrated masters degree is often the cheapest route to a masters degree.

The integrated MEng degree developed early, since an accredited masters is a requirement to become a chartered engineer in the UK. Such courses, at least in theory, include the content of a bachelors degree, plus the content of a standalone postgraduate masters degree, often with an option to abandon early and receive a bachelor's degree. PhDs, MScs and MPhils almost invariably require a degree as an entry requirement, hence they are postgraduate degrees.


Pursuing Ph.D abroad vs staying in a stable job abroad I'm kind of in the early-midlife crisis, and I have spent quite some time googling some of my life's questions. I don't have a better idea of where should I ask this and get some insight.
I'm a 29 years old single, from a third world country, MSc graduate from a reputable European university, currently have a relatively decent, stable engineering job in Germany, and long term visa which I know I can already change it to a German-permanent residence permit. However, I'm still craving to go back to the Uni and pursue a Ph.D. I constantly checking the opening Ph.D. vacancies in the city where I live (in the subject of my interest). But I seldom found something interesting vacancies being advertised. I assume I need to make my first move by contacting the suitable professor in order to apply and pursue a Ph.D. in the city where I currently live in the subject I would like to deal. I'm not keen to move to another city/country regarding the visa topic and the fact that I have set up my flat etc. It's just gonna be too much hassle to move again.
However, every time I "accidentally" found Ph.D. vacancies being advertised in other countries in the subject I love, I always question whether staying here is a really good decision. It's been 2-3 years since I live here, and to be honest, I don't feel really happy. Sometimes I feel really isolated, sometimes I convince my self that this city is the best place to settle down, etc. I'm kind of 3 steps away from the subject I would like to deal with every day (research and development in a certain specific area). And the language barrier is real in professional-industrial-work. I'm working really slow on my German. Sometimes I wonder, probably I would have less language issue if I go back to Uni/ move to a "more relax" English speaking country (e.g: NL/UK/US ??).
I'm really lost. Should I stay in this job, should I be more patience learning the language and "create" my own Ph.D. opportunity in the city where I already live (to avoid the hassle of moving again), should I apply when I find interesting PhD opportunity in another country? or even should I go back to my own country? I'm kind of tired of moving, kind of lost the sense of belonging, but at the same time, I'm not happy staying either.
any chance that someone at the moment/ever feeling the same?

Those are big questions and I can't give you answers to them. It is your call and yours alone.
BUT, I can give you my point of view. I fairly recently finished a 6-year-long PhD in the UK. I was already a bit older than the average student when I was starting it and moved to the UK from Austria.
Personally, I don't recommend doing a PhD unless you want to stay in the academia.
If you want to become a university professor, there is no other way than doing a PhD. From a professional point of view, it often not worth it (money is not always better than with a Masters & you get harder a job, because you are suddenly overqualified). However, if you really want to do one (because of whatever reasons) and you would end up regretting not doing one, then do it. (consider also the next points)
How is it to do a PhD:
It really depends on who your supervisor is!!! (I can't stress that enough)
While it is for some people a great experience, and they love their PhD times, in my experience, the majority of people don't have a great time.

You are under a lot of stress for long periods
You write and try to publish a lot (many supervisors pushing for publications because it benefits their own profile).
In many cases, you need to do a lot of work on the side that doesn't add to your PhD.
Generally you work significantly more than 40h a week.
The pay is not great (depends on the country). In the UK you have 1200 GBP/month to live from. That's not much. The payment usually goes for 3 years, but most people needed 4. (I needed 6).
Depending on your supervisor this can be a bit more relaxed or very stressful and frustrating. In my group of friends, most people didn't have any social life and other activities. They just lived for their PhD (me included).
However, it is not all bad. It can be quite interesting (the work), you go on conferences where you meet other scientists and exchange ideas (if you can afford to go).

Where matters:
Doing a PhD in the UK is very different to doing one in Germany (for instance).
In the UK, you are treated like a student (similar to an undergraduate student). You don't have a salary and you're not employed.
In Germany, you are treated more like an academic/colleague and you're usually you are employed. It doesn't sound like much, but that makes a big difference on how you are treated.
In the UK, you can do a PhD in 3 years with very strict deadlines. In Germany, it is more open. It takes as long as it takes. (This can reduce stress)
Mental Health during a PhD:
OK I make this a specific point because it is important to say.
A PhD is very stressful and demanding on your mental health as well.
I had many co-PhD students that ended up with a bad depression; one even suicidal. This stems for many things: for instance, from high stress, sometimes social isolation, insecurities (being not sure about their work, their skills, their progress ..),...
A lot of PhD students just dropped out because they couldn't take it.
Social Contact:
The good thing in a PhD is that you have other PhD students going through the same as you and you can bond very well. (depends also on you personally). I got great friendships from my PhD times. But that also depends on how you approach people. Many PhD people (especially in engineering) are a bit socially awkward; if that's not a problem then you're fine :).
Having said that, if you worked before and do a PhD a bit later in life, it can be also tricky as many PhD students just finished their degree (23-years old in the UK). They are in a completely different stage in life.
Applying for a PhD:
If you still want to do a PhD, pick a Supervisor carefully. Email them, ask them for ideas or upcoming projects. Try to visit them in advance and see how they are and maybe talk to some of his/her PhD students separately. You WILL spend years working with him/her! I didn't do that and there were moments when I really regretted it.
In most cases, they want you to come up with an idea. That's really difficult, particularly if you haven't work in that area for long. Try not to be too practical. Have a theoretical component as well.
If possible try to get a funded project. A funded project is usually well-defined and most PhD students with such pre-defined projects finish in very short times and had great experiences. In contrast, a good friend of mine started his PhD without any boundaries and suffered for long period as couldn't define the focus of his work (even after two years). In the end, it turned out well.
So this was a longer post (sorry). But. I want you to be aware of how it is. I was oblivious to most of these point.
Overall, I can't tell you what you should do. Try to see if your local University offers interesting PhD places, then you don't need to move and PhD-salaries are generally better in Germany. Try socializing apps, if you feel isolated. Germans can be a bit distance and one feels easily isolated, but in my experience, they welcome you if they see you making efforts. If you want a restart, then moving is also a great opportunity.


Importance of PhD pedigree when applying for tenure-track jobs How much weight does a department's hiring committee give to the prestige of a candidate's PhD program when looking to hire tenure-track professors?

Does someone coming from a top 5 university with a short publication record have a better chance than someone from a ranked ~50 school with a better record?

In philosophy in the US, graduates of the top 5 programs got 37% of the total jobs. Graduates of the roughly 75 programs not ranked in the top 50 all together got 12% of the total jobs. The impact of prestige on hiring is overwhelming.

http://philosopherscocoon.typepad.com/blog/2014/04/on-sample-data-on-this-years-tt-hires.html

Edit

Spurred by xLeitex's comments below, I did a bit more research and thus am
editing my answer to provide a few more links I've found, since I think the topic is both important, and it comes up somewhat regularly on the site.

First, Baldi 1995 found that "job placement in sociology values academic origins over performance."

Second, Burris 2004, 250 argues that the "social capital" involved in coming from a prestigious department affects not only one's placement into a first job, but also one's subsequent academic career.

Third, Long 1978, 902 argues that scholarly productivity is "facilitated by department location" but that "productivity, as indicated by measures of publication and citation, plays an insignificant role in the selection process."

Certainly the picture that these three articles present makes it looks like prestige of one's PhD granting department isn't merely correlated with getting a successful academic career, but is an important causal factor.