How should I mention the period between the end of my post-PhD and the beginning of my work as research staff? I finished my post-PhD, after two years working under a scholarship, in April 2015. In September 2015 I was notified that I was accepted as research staff in my institution (I applied in December 2014). In September 2016 I was finally added to the "payroll" as a staff member.

Between the period April 2015 - September 2016, I kept receiving my post-PhD scholarship in what is known in my country as an "extension of the post-PhD". This is done because the time that passes between the end of the post-PhD and the final addition of your name to the payroll (if you are accepted) is rather long. In my case it took about a year and a half (which is the standard period), and this way one is not left with no monthly income.

The question is: how should I describe that period in my CV? Anyone from my country will be able to tell immediately what happened, but I'm not sure how to explain this to people from other countries.

In rigour my post-PhD ended in April 2015, so I can't really say I was working on it for an extra 1.5 year. What I did for that period of time was what I do now: research. But I can't say that I started working as a researcher after April 2015, because my first actual paycheck as such didn't come until September 2016.

In the comments you said it is called an "Extensión de posdoctorado".  It is fine to list that phrase as your job title during the period.  It is reasonably clear to english speakers.

People reading international CVs expect to see unfamiliar terms and career progression.


How to contact professors for a Ph.D position in France, when I don't have a research question? I completed Master's in Netherlands in Aerodynamics and I am looking for Ph.D in the field of aerospace in France. In Netherlands & Germany, I can see the available Ph.D offers in University website but I don't know how to search in France? I really want to stay there!

I see some people in this forum answered to contact professor directly (for example, in What is the process for PhD applications and contacting professors in France?) but I don't have an Ph.D research question. So, don't know how to contact them. Can someone tell me how to contact a professor and whom to contact for funding?

Professors (and possibly alumni) at your university in the Netherlands probably have contact information for collegues around the world. If not, they could help you find someone who does.

Otherwise, the GIFAS (the national association of aerospace industries)  has published a catalog of École Doctorales and a website which has a section about training.


Is attempting to get published in undergraduate history journals worth it? I'm very interested in trying to get published as a history major in order to ease my path towards becoming a history professor, so I've been thinking about trying to do research on my own. As a result, I want to get published before I graduate but I hear it's not easy to get published in regular journals so I was thinking I should get published in try an undergraduate journal instead. Would that be a better alternative or no? If not, what are some tips to getting published in a regular journal?

First of all, if you've already written an excellent paper of which you are proud of, then why not submit it to an undergraduate history publication? It certainly won't hurt your chances for graduate school admissions. In fact, I would say that it certainly demonstrates interest and willingness to engage in the academic community of your chosen field. This is something that graduate admissions look for and care about when they're evaluating your application.

Undergraduate publishing opportunities are quite plentiful, and many of them are becoming very well-recognized. In my opinion, I've found that the writing/research published in the best history journals are neck-to-neck with papers that could pass a graduate thesis defense.

I would encourage you to check out:
http://history.unc.edu/undergraduate-program/undergraduate-journals/
with an emphasis on Yale's and Vanderbilt's undergraduate (which are one of the few journals open to undergrads from all universities rather than just serving their own university/college). (Full disclosure, I am an editor of the latter, see: http://vanderbilthistoricalreview.com)


What is the best way (terminology) for a postdoc (PDRA) to refer to their 'boss'/'supervisor'? A postdoc, postdoctoral research assistant in a university on a contract has a supervisor or a boss. They may not be the PI on the grant which pays the salary as it may contain other universities as well.

In conversation and in email, what is the best term to use for your postdoc boss? Something doesn't seem correct with the term boss or manager, or even supervisor.

I've heard "supervisor", "advisor" and "mentor".  They can be clarified as "postdoc advisor", etc, to avoid confusion with a Ph.D. advisor.

There's also the simpler "I work with Professor Smith."


Is it safe to use pirated software for Doctoral research? I am using unlicensed simulation software (downloaded from torrents) for Doctoral Thesis (and Research papers) on my personal laptop without the knowledge of my institution as the university doesn't have the licensed software. 1) Is this safe?
2) Can I be questioned by the software vendor. 3) Can my paper be retracted from journals?

(I'm uninterested in answers relating to free student versions of software and freeware.)

It’s not OK to use unlicensed software. I would suspect that advisors would be very concerned about one of their students using an expensive software package for which they didn’t have a license, since they might have liability for letting you use it.

If it’s so important, then you should talk to your advisor about getting a license.

While I am not personally familiar with people having degrees revoked for using unlicensed software, I could certainly sympathize with arguments calling for sanctions against people who do so.


Permission on reproduction of data extracted from a figure I have been studying a recent paper, and wanted to extract the some data from it, in an effort to reproduce it. I wrote to the authors, and got no response, so I got the raw data by digitalizing a figure in the paper where the data is plotted.

Then I made another plot, where I plot  the raw data together with mine on top of each other, to compare them. If I publish this plot and properly cite their paper, do I need to ask them for permission?

It looks like I don't, because this is not like copying and pasting a figure of theirs, but I am not 100% sure.

Please find enclosed the webpage of the publishing company where I plan to publish, which contains information on their policy on the matter. The  chapter relevant to my case seems to be this one.

I plot the raw data together with mine

The plot is yours, the data is theirs.

  If I publish this plot and properly cite their paper, do I need to ask them for permission?

No, the citation (and suitable explanation) suffices to attribute the data source. Indeed, as noted by the referenced source (under the heading Reuse of graphs/tables...):

...reuse of raw data does not generally need permission, provided you have plotted
it into a different graph/table. You should however cite the source of the data.


Has a STEM professor ever won an Oscar? Has a STEM professor ever been nominated for - or won - an Oscar for their academic research?

Yes.

For example, a professor from Stanford, Rod Fedkiw, won an Oscar in 2015. You can read about it in the following article:

Stanford professor wins Oscar for science of destroying things


How to deal with low quality software project that needs to be evaluated I have evaluated a software project which has been created by a consortium of top scientists in the field. However, the project itself it doesn't really work, and has only been developed as a proof-of-concept rather than an end product (i.e., it works only with 2-3 scenarios).

This software application should perform 4 steps in order to successfully execute. Each step takes an input file, and produces an output file. The output file from the previous step is used as input in the current step.
Initially, you start with 1 file. This file is used as input for step 1. After step 1, another file is produced. Let’s call the input file general_input_file, and the output file general_output_file. When general_input_file is loaded into the application, general_output_file should be produced. Now, I have an input file which I will call my_input_file. I expect the application to produce my_output_file. However, the application only accepts specific_input_file and will produce a specific_output_file. This means that it only works with 2 files which has been previously generated. Both files exist in the project. When I look at the part of the project which should process the general_input_file, there is a statement which looks like this: if the name of the given input file equals specific_input_file, then return specific_output_file. This is a file inside the project. Otherwise, try to process the generate_input_file and generate general_output_file. At this point the software breaks. A number of exceptions are thrown, and debugging and fixing this is beyond of the work that I’m doing.

The question is: in the paper, how do you approach this issue? And how do you argue, in the paper, that the reason you're unable to evaluate the software in a different scenario is due to the limitations of the software? What is the best wording to be used, without being offensive to the authors?

When I look at the part of the project which should process the
  general_input_file, there is a statement which looks like this: if the
  name of the given input file equals specific_input_file, then return
  specific_output_file. [...]
  Otherwise, try to process the generate_input_file and generate
  general_output_file. At this point the software breaks.

By your description, it sounds like the code you are looking at is cheating by returning a precomputed output known to be correct if the input matches a single sample input the authors included with their code (presumably to demonstrate its correctness and because including a sample input was required to get their paper accepted). For all input instances other than this one sample input, the code does something entirely different, which doesn't produce correct results.

This sort of behavior would without question merit a failing grade in a programming course homework assignment or exam. If done in the context of a commercial product, similar behavior would justify the resignation of the CEO and a multibillion dollar scandal. So, saying that the code is "of low quality" seems to me so euphemistic as to be itself a dishonest statement. The way I would describe it is: if the authors are claiming that their code is correct, then they are lying.

Now, I could discuss your actual question of how to discuss this situation in your follow-up paper "without being offensive to the authors," but honestly, I don't see the point. I would ask instead, why would you want to not be offensive to the authors? It's not just that the authors' algorithm may be wrong and that their code is of poor quality; they are seemingly committing academic fraud by submitting an incorrect algorithm with code dishonestly tweaked to make it seem like the algorithm is working. I'm willing to leave a 3% chance that some other more innocent explanation can be proposed, but given the description you've provided I really can't think of one. I'll be happy to reconsider if you provide a bit more detail on how the authors' claims are presented in the paper.


Publish a paper with flaws, improve it, or let it go? As a PI, I have quite a few projects that have gone nowhere. For some of these projects, I have submitted a manuscript that has been rejected. In others, I have written portions of a manuscript, but feel like the results are rather inconclusive. I could submit these manuscripts as they are, but I find it difficult to write papers with inconclusive results (there's no story to tell). It feels unethical to resubmit papers where I have not addressed the flaws pointed out by the reviewers. I suppose I can just be as upfront as possible about the flaws, but this also takes some time and finesse. It seems like the amount of time I'd have to put into these manuscripts to address the flaws would be better spent on projects that are working and have promising results.
My grad school advisor seemed to be of the mindset that you should just keep revising and resubmitting a manuscript until it gets accepted. I sometimes felt like he was succumbing to a sunk cost fallacy and that the time we put into rescuing these projects wasn't worth it. There's also the argument that you should publish any work you do, even dead ends, because it will avoid duplication and save other people time. But putting anything in a publishable form takes time and effort, which takes away from other projects. What is the opinion of the community on these issues?
Another complication can be the involvement of others in the project (students, technicians), who would like to have a better publication record. However, in many cases, it might be faster to make them part of a better, more promising project than to dump time into a project that isn't working.
I'm trying to be more choosy about the projects I take on in the future to avoid this dilemma, but it's hard to know where a project will go. I'd like some advice on how to handle such projects/unpublished manuscripts. Just submit them to a preprint server and forget about them? Submit them to journals that have a low enough bar? How do you decide whether work is worth salvaging?

My thoughts on

How do you decide whether work is worth salvaging?

I think a better question is how to salvage, not how to decide whether to salvage.
You even suggest some possibilities

If the referees' reports suggest changes that you think make sense
then the review process is working. Make the changes and resubmit,
there or elsewhere.
Clean up some obvious bad places and post as a preprint.
Incorporate the good parts in another project.
Some dead ends should be acknowledged as such - and published. See What to do when you spend several months working on an idea that fails in a masters thesis?
Maybe the referees were right to reject. I have two manuscripts from
years ago that I never reworked or resubmitted.


Referencing future ideas in abstract of a research paper Is it bad to reference ideas which have not yet been defined in detail within the abstract for a research paper? For example, if I have a section (lets say section 4) in my paper that defines a new concept such as "The Quadrilateral Optimization", within my abstract, would it be acceptable to write "The Quadrilateral Optimization (§4) excels specifically with points that are randomly generated."

A paper containing a concept X can be cited with respect to X if any one or more of the following applies:

X is clearly defined
An intuition of X is provided
A constraint of X is explained
An application of X is experimented
An application concerning X is accounted
A logically contradicting definition of X is theorized

A mere inclusion of the name of the concept X does not mean that it deserves to be cited


Is the author of a letter of recommendation notified that their letter has been submitted? My professor wants to give me a letter of recommendation for a graduate school that I am applying which I will submit via scanning. She didn't give offline recommendation to any One. So she wants to know, when I will submit the recommendation, will there be any email sent from the admission council to the professor informing a letter in her name has been submitted. It will be great if anyone here can inform me if there is any such process like this.

In recent years, my experience has been that, when I submit letters of recommendation via automated web systems (which is the most common situation), I get an automated confirmation. When I submit letters via individual emails, I sometimes get confirmations but usually not.


I am in systems Phd program, but I want to do theoretical research I am 3rd year Phd student. So far I have been doing systems research in top US university. I realized that I want to do theory (in particular machine learning (ML) theory), but unfortunately I do not have any publications in that area. I do not have good math background, I never majored in math, and I did only basic math classes back in undergrad more than 6 years ago. So you realize that my math skills are very-very weak.
But I truly enjoy learning maths, read ML papers, read theory papers, even though I struggle. It makes me feel happy, intellectually inspired and motivated.
Meantime I completely do not care about systems research.
That said I am def much much much less qualified than most Phd students in theory who majored in math, have tons of experience and publications.

Do I even have a chance to switch to theory? Should I even talked to professors? I am completely fine to stretch my Phd for the next 5-6 years (since if I switch I will need to start from the beginning and have a long period of learning).

Do you think I should give it a shot? Is it even feasible?

Of course you should give it a shot!  People switch fields all the time.  One of my most successful PhD students (in algorithms) started in my department as a systems PhD student.

Your first step should be to talk to faculty who do ML theory in your department, and ask them how to get involved, given your current background.  They might suggest classes to take for remediation; they might suggest specific papers to read/problems to work on that exploit your systems background; they might suggest first getting a master's degree (if you don't have one already) and then reapplying broadly to PhD programs.  If you are very very lucky, they may be willing to take you on as a student and offer you funding while you transition.

But one word of warning.  As I'm sure you already  know, competition for PhD admission in machine learning is incredibly fierce.  AI has always been the default subfield for smart CS students who want to go to grad school but really know what they want to do, but the popularity of machine learning has exploded over the last five years.  Last year, half of the almost 1000 applications for my CS department's PhD program listed AI/ML as their primary research area, and two-thirds listed AI/ML as a possible research area, even though only a small minority of our faculty work in that area.  (Of those roughly 500 applicants, we offered admission to about 50, and about 20 accepted our offer.)  This competition may make it harder for you to pursue a PhD in ML at your current institution.  That doesn't mean that moving to ML is impossible, but it may be difficult, and you may need to pursue multiple avenues to make it happen.

Best of luck!


How long and detailed should be the rejection comment when reviewing and rejecting a paper? If someone is a reviewer and recommends major revisions to a medical journal paper, the review can be quite lengthy. (e.g., list of 10-15 points to work on)

On the other hand, how detailed should be the rejection review. Are you expected to provide more than 2 paragraphs justification for the rejection?

Is there any study on length of reviews that reject the paper. I would guess it would be most likely under 2 paragraphs of text. Is that correct?

Short answer: I think it is very disrespectful (or not good) to reject a paper by writing one single paragraph. If a reviewer thinks that there are obvious flaws that cannot be described clearly, then the reviewer shall simply not review the paper.

The reviewer may have not understood the paper well: Personally, many times I get a first negative impression of a paper. I try then to write a summary of the paper. Then I realize that "Oh the author meant this !" or "Oh, this actually works !" -- this usually lead me to realize at the end that the paper is good.

The authors spent a lot of time writing the paper (they are looking for constructive comments most of the time): From another point of view, put yourself in the authors shoes. They have spent a lot of time (obviously) writing the paper. They are smart people (otherwise, they would have not reached this level to write a paper). Then obviously, there is something to get from them.  If the reviewer thinks that this is not enough, then strong comments should be written. In any case, a reviewer should spend a relatively long period of time in each page of the paper.

The reviewer may not have treated the problem from all perspectives:
Note also that - in some cases - the reviewer may have experienced the problem from one single perspective, whereas the paper attacks the problem from a different perspective. Treating a problem with a different perspective is the best way to solve the problem IMHO. It only enriches the literature.


Submit Similar Content to Two Conferences Assuming that I have some methodology for monitoring ecological behavior that I wish to publish on, how much overlap is acceptable between an ecological paper and a computational algorithm paper, published at different times?

Actually, think, rather, in terms of how much is unique in the two papers. If each has sufficient novelty and each is independently interesting, then you should be fine.

This is a judgement call, of course, and it might be best to make it a bit conservatively so that no one thinks you are just padding a CV. Likewise, ask yourself if people would think that you just split things that should be said together into two papers for padding the CV.

And remember that it is your judgement call to make, but others will make it also.

In the example you cite, of course, it seems as if one paper is focused on an application and the other on methodology. That seems (to an outsider like myself) to be fine, especially if a deep explanation of the methodology is both interesting on its own and not essential to the application.


Is there anyway to "get credit" for post Masters work on a resume? I quit my PhD in physics about a year and a half ago. I started school in 2011, got my token Masters in 2013, and passed my quals. I then did about 2.5 years of research, mostly coding, to verify the theoretical models my advisor and I were working on.

This actually turned me on to high performance computing. Combine this with a distaste for poverty and I jumped ship to be a software engineer.  Now I'm looking at a promotion and I'm trying to get credit for my time working as a developer for my advisor.  HR "requires" 3 years of professional experience for promotion to the level I'm trying to achieve.

Can I spin the time as a sort of free lance dev? If so,  how? I refuse to let HR dismiss this developmental time of my career.

Research assistant is a job as well as part of an education, and it is common to see it listed as part of one's appointments on an academic CV.  After all, you are being paid for the work you do (even if typically at a subsistence level).

It would thus seem quite reasonable to list it that way on an industrial resume as well, as part of your list of prior employment, thereby providing a clear statement of your time working in that capacity.  Whether your HR department is reasonable enough to accept this or not is an entirely unrelated question, I'm afraid.


How to overcome discouragement on finding major error in work just before paper submission? Recently, we were working on a new idea in physics and engineering. At the end (after writing almost 6 drafts and even ready to submit draft) only I realized that I had made a stupid error in calculation and some errors crept up from numerical simulations. So it changed one main result which was the crux of the paper. Now the new result is not appealing as well. I explained the situation to my advisor over email and I am yet to meet him.

I am feeling so hopeless and diffident in the work. Has anyone else faced similar situation? How did you overcome?

We spent about an average of 4 months on this. Do you think I wasted a lot of time of my advisor on this and how can I try not to make errors in the future?

I think that the best way to overcome your situation is to realize that nothing out of ordinary happened - to err is human. In my opinion, research is about discovering truth and enriching knowledge (including the one of the researchers'). And making mistakes is a natural part of the process. I would just discuss my work with advisor openly and do my best to learn from that.

I don't think that you have wasted anybody's time. I (along with many other people) believe that negative results are also valuable (for example, see this paper, this journal and this workshop). The same applies to other results, such as similar to existing results, not impressive results, etc.

As for strategies for not making mistakes, I don't think there are any to prevent them completely, as I said, but you can reduce their probability by not advancing too fast in your research (i.e., rushing to obtain results or to publish) as well as asking feedback on your work from other people beyond your advisor or other people closely involved in the research (perhaps, even, from other disciplines, in order to obtain opinions, based on different perspectives).


Is it better to go for a postdoc in the US or Europe? I've recently got my PhD in Europe and I am doing applications for the postdoc positions in Europe and in the US. I've got two possible offers and I am a bit confused to decide which position would be better for my future. One of the offers is from the US and the other one is in Europe. My initial plan was to choose the position in Europe and to spend some more time to expand my academic network by staying close to home. Meanwhile, I am almost sure that I eventually need to go to the US either I decide to stay in academia or go into the industry in the future, since it is very difficult to settle in the Northern European countries as an expat or a foreigner researcher due to different reasons (mostly because of the social life, language and funding options etc.), at least I need to spend some time there to be not seen as only moving inside of Europe. I am also not planning to go back my country at the junior research level since it is too challenging to secure a job as well (Mediterranean country).

I still would like to take the position in Europe and then try to find a better position ( as research associate, Assistant prof or instructor/ senior postdoc) in the US later. Do you think would it be better to go there directly after my PhD? Would it reduce my chance to find a position in the US if I do a postdoc in  Europe first?

PS : The position in the US is so close to my current field, it is very similar to my PhD topic. I will still learn different methods and expand my skills technically but the scientific approach is not so different what I have done in my PhD. It has good job benefits for two years (e.g. health, pension etc.) except the visa (J1) though.

The answer to this question will come down to your personal circumstances and goals. There will be advantages and disadvantages to both options (both professionally and personally) that only you can know and weigh up. And, of course, it matters more how good the postdoc will be for your development than what continent it is in.

However, it sounds like your goal is to eventually end up in the US. In that case, my suggestion would be that there is no time like the present to make the move. Getting a position in the US is tough and it helps to have as many local contacts as possible, so you should start building them up as soon as possible.


(Paper submission) Institution vs affiliation I'm about to submit a paper to a scientific journal. among the info required there are 1) "institution" which is mandatory and 2) " affiliation".
My question is: what's the difference?
I'm an Adjunct Professor now, so I think in my case that for the institution it refers to the place where I got my PhD while for the affiliation it refers to the place where I'm actually working. However, I want to stress that my role in academia is reserved for teaching activities.
What do you think?

Institution usually refers to the institution that the work was done at, or at least who pays the bills for that particular author most of the time.  For many authors this is the only institution they are affiliated with, so it really makes no difference.
Affiliation refers to other organizations that the author is affiliated with.  For instance, say I am a researcher at university A, but a medical doctor at an associated hospital (I'm not, but just say...).  Then I might list the university as my institution (because they paid for my lab space, perhaps they had the research ethics board etc) but I am affiliated with the hospital as well, which is where the research subjects came from.  I would list both, because both organizations should be recognized for their financial or in-kind contributions to the work.
Sometimes, authors have multiple affiliations just because they've been given appointments by other organizations, whether because they want to boost their prestige or because there was a relevant reason for this to happen.  For instance, if a university researcher is working on a space mission and they are given appointments by some NASA research centers, they might list those appointments as their affiliations.  These organizations may have contributed lab space, equipment, funding, personnel etc, all under the guidance of the researcher, and the organizations should therefore be listed.
Sometimes it is necessary to divulge a conflict of interest as well.  Say that I am a university researcher doing research on a drug for a company that I am also on the board of directors for.  I should mention that company in my affiliations (among other things)


Journal editor does not appear to pursue report of self-plagiarism This is a follow-up to an earlier question about a case of blatant self-plagiarism, following which I contacted the editor of the concerned journal.

The editor did not acknowledge my initial report. It took a polite follow-up email about a month later before I got an answer saying that they were looking into the report and that they would let me know what they found. Since it is a blatant case, I expected that the investigation would be over pretty quickly. After I hadn't heard anything for about another month, I sent another polite email to ask about the status of the investigation. Another month has passed since then and still there has been no reply.

I get the impression that the editor does not appear to pursue this case. Of course I know that the editor must be very busy, but I do not think it is unreasonable to expect something to have happened more than 3 months after the initial report.

I tried to get in touch with the managing editor of the journal, but was told that the publisher will not provide the contact information. To put it mildly, I find this all very discouraging. I expected that reports of self-plagiarism would be taken more seriously despite the offence not being as serious as plagiarism or fabrication.

What should I do next?

One other option is to go public (as jakebeal mentions in his answer to your previous question). I would suggest a step in between in which you would send another email to the editor stating that you are disappointed with the lack of progress as well as with the editor ignoring you, and letting them know that such unprofessionalism lets you with no other options but to let the public know.

Should they again fail to act and depending on your time/effort you are willing to invest, take the next step. My next step would be informing the institution of the self-plagiarizing individual about the whole situation. If you again hit a brick wall, you still have a nice story (self plagiarization and cover up by journal and institution) for some journalist, blog, higher institution, etc. (I guess you'll know best who to inform)


What is a Scientific approach to Law and Epistemology? In an extended discussion in Law SE chat, there was a description of the legal approach to epistemology, namely one that is dependent upon the findings of the various actors of the criminal justice system: police, defendants and plaintiffs, judges, lawyers, and juries. The specific quote that I wanted to touch upon was:

  It means that science and law fundamentally (and, one could argue, incompatibly) disagree on the nature of truth. In science, no group exists that can declare something "fact". In law, that's what juries and/or judges do. Asking scientific questions about something science considers impossible is akin to asking what color the most magical unicorns are. - cHao

But despite this, I know that there is a distinct gap in my knowledge of both realms to conclusively address the issue.

  How would you test it? It is fundamental that juries decide what is fact from disputed evidence (juries have nothing to do when the parties agree what the facts are). How do you set up your double blind experiment when there is no way of telling objectively who the guilty and not guilty defendants are? - Dale M

Taking a research-approach to the question, I posited a rough sketch of how I would've approached the topic.

  @DaleM complete taking a guess here, a control (12 jurors) and different experimental groups consisting of different sizes. A known “case” where it is known with a p value of <0.05 that the defendant is X (can be real or imagined). The prosecution (study confederate) would present evidence systematically and equally to all groups but without knowing actual case X. Based on experimental results, determine optimal jury size. - Me

So I ask:

Why is there a fundamental gap between law and science?
Can the two ever be 'merged' or 'reconciled'?
How would both realms work if they adopted attributes from either realm?

Courts have to make a definite decision (that can only be appealed so often) about what the law is in every given case. The law reduces uncertainty.

Scientific progress builds on fallibility, at least in the empirical sciences. The final proof is always elusive, postponed indefinitely. And because every provisional answer invites new questions, science produces uncertainty.

Both systems can, fundamentally, not be reconciled, because they operate according to different logics.


How to find out the first name of a professor whose home page lists only first initial? This is probably a soft question. I am interested in complex analysis, and I want to ask the first name of this person, S. Ponnusamy, whose name I wish to mention in a paper.

What is the best way to go about asking such stuff?

If you are at a university that has access to MathSciNet, then you can look up any one of his publications (listed on the web page you linked to), and then click on his name to find out that his first name is Saminathan.


Interested in development sector but unsure about Ph.D I have just completed an M.Sc. in Economics with a specialisation in Development Studies from a reputed university in India.

I am interested in eventually working in the development sector.
I have a reasonable level of interest in doing research in areas related to development economics.
I have an intermediate level of proficiency in mathematics and statistics.

However, I am unsure about doing a Ph.D in Economics.
What are some things I must consider and know before deciding to do a Ph.D in economics?

I would consider the following:

1) Do the jobs you want require a PhD? You may be able to have a satisfying career and a choice of many interesting and well-paid jobs (you define both of those terms for yourself) with a M.Sc. and on-the-ground experience.

2) Are you likely to succeed in a PhD? There is little point to pursuing a PhD if you fail out of the program. So, you need to assess your preparation and whether you are likely to be able to complete the PhD. If you are not sure, talk to some of your mentors who have PhDs.

3) Are you competitive for fully-funded PhD positions at respected universities? To make the time, effort, and opportunity costs involved in pursuing a PhD worthwhile, you should pursue programs that are fully-funded and that maximize the value of your degree post-gradation. These types of programs are more competitive, so you should assess (with mentor's help, if needed) your academic record and other factors to determine if you are a good candidate for such programs.


Getting assistance for publishing a paper without experience I have a master’s degree in computer science. I wanted to publish my thesis as paper because I got a good grade, and I because I want to  get accepted for a PhD degree by a top-200 university or to get work as a TA at a university.

I used existing resources and applied them on a different data set, but the results were not clear and need optimization – which will need more time (I'll do it if I have a chance to get a PhD or getting a job in this matter).

I wrote the paper according to my naive knowledge in publishing and the whole field. My goal was not acceptance, but rather getting feedback and a taste of how things work. I sent my paper to a conference; of course it was refused. I sent it to a journal, who refused. The feedback was that my paper is a draft, has language mistakes, and most of references were old. Of course I asked my supervisor for assistance,  but things didn’t went well for many reasons. One of these reasons is that we have no clear results although the method was very good and promising on the long run.

I was wondering if I can get assistance from other parties like doctors from other universities, but it didn't work for me. Maybe this is because I asked doctors from high-ranked universities so they may already have a heavy load.

What should I do?

Inviting a professor with whom you don't have an established relationship to co-write a paper with you is rather futile, I think. In the first place, such people are extremely busy. Second, they don't know you and the quality of your work. Third, they don't know whether your findings are without blemish (by this I mean that the results, your analysis, the data and the methods were conducted to their satisfaction). Finally, they would wonder, as do I and I'm sure a number of us here, why you would be approaching them and not your supervisor or other teachers. Perhaps your supervisor turned you down for the reason that the work, while garnering a high score, isn't worthy of publication. This last one would be my biggest concern.

On the other hand, you might attract early-career academics hungry for an easy publication given that the thesis is already written.

Just a few things to note:

It seems to me that the rejections you've received from previous attempts have been due to language issues. In most cases, if the language of the submitted manuscript is substandard, then the paper is not sent for review. I think you should make an effort to correct the mistakes and resubmitting the manuscript. You might then be able to receive feedback about the content of the work rather than the language.
Instead of spending time finding strangers with whom to collaborate on this paper, I suggest that you resurrect the relationship you had with your supervisor.
If you do choose to try to attract strangers, be very careful about their motives and be clear about your expectations.
You might be focusing on the wrong thing here. If your goal is entry into a PhD programme, then a publication isn't the only way you can prove your capabilities. By focusing on this, you might be neglecting other areas that require attention as, for example, bolstering your language abilities, especially if there is a language requirement that you need to hurdle.

PS. Just by-the-by, I have seen a number of such invitations on ResearchGate, which was one of the many, many reasons I've abandoned by profile. You might try your luck there, though.

Good luck to you!


Is it reasonable to use full word and abbreviation in parenthesis in a chapter title? Can I use full word plus its abbreviation in parenthesis in a chapter title?
here is my case:

Chapter 2
Human Immune System (HIS)

is it correct? Is there any differences if the the full word have appeared before in the previous chapter content.

I can not say this is incorrect, but it is probably unorthodox. If there are no strong reason to put an abbreviation in the title, you may wish to introduce it in the first sentences of the chapter itself.


Could getting an MS in CS be bad for my career? I'm in the following situation. My first 7 months out of college, I worked software job I really didn't like, and then I hopped on to another job I like. I've been in that second job for about a year now, and even though my career is doing pretty OK, I'm thinking about going back to school for a MS and maybe a PhD. I have some concerns about going back to school that I was hoping I could get some insight on.

I didn't get funding for graduate school because I did no research as an undergrad and thus had weak references, but tuition for one of the better programs I got in to is rather low as its a state school and I'm in state ( Umass amherst). I was making a bit over six figures for both of my jobs, and I've saved up more than enough money to cover both my undergrad loans, and pay the entire cost of the master's program + living expenses.

I want to give grad school a try because I've gotten really into computer science these past two years, and I'd like to study it full time for two years while doing research. In college, I was too busy dealing with a deep depression and health problems to excell as a student to the degree I know I'm capable of, and I want to have the academic computer science experience I dreamed of when I was in highschool but was robbed of due to circumstances.

I am, however, concerned about my employability post-MS. I will have had two short stints on my resume - a 7 month job and a 19 month job - making me look like a disloyal job hopper, and I'm afraid that potential employers might be turned off by my over-education should I choose to go back to programming. I'm also concerned that my department might not treat me with respect as a self-funded student. If they thought I was good, they would have probably offered me funding.

How are MS degrees viewed in the industry? Are my concerns valid at all?

One recurring issue I've seen in folks considering a CS M.S. or Ph.D. is a belief that the advanced degree will qualify them to employers as some sort of "super-programmer". This is generally not the case, and I think it's where folks get the notion that an advanced degree can hurt your job prospects. In my experience very few companies are interested in hiring folks with advanced degrees for jobs that can be handled far more cheaply by someone with no degree, but a lot of experience.

Where an advanced degree becomes helpful is in domain knowledge. Somebody with a C.S. Ph.D. may or may not be a decent web site developer, but there is supposed to be some (tiny) area of CS where they know as much as anybody on the planet. If they can find a company that needs that particular bit of knowledge (or something closely related), they have a good shot at a well paying job.

Once you have an advanced degree you shouldn't be looking for "programming" jobs, you should be looking for jobs as an expert in a topic like machine learning, compiler code generation, agile methodology, high-availability databases, etc. etc. There aren't as many of these jobs as there are "programmer" jobs, but there is also a lot less competition for them. Lots of excellent programmers are self-taught, but not so many experts in convex optimization.


How to submit errata when a coauthor disagrees Some years ago, I was the primary author on a paper in which some of the work was performed by a grad student. At the time I did not notice an error in his work, and so the derivation provided in the paper is incorrect. I contacted my coauthors, included the (former) grad student. The other authors readily agreed to have their names on the errata paper, but the former grad student disagreed and feels that his work was without error. And so he said that he did not want his name on the errata. Contacting the journal that published the original paper, the editor is not willing to publish an errata paper in which the author list does not include the entire list of authors from the original paper.

So I'm stuck. I'm quite certain about the error, and frustrated with the former student's insistence on being correct. But now there is no way to get the errata into the literature. The journal editor suggested perhaps publishing the changes as a "comment paper", but comment papers are only allowed if written by someone other than one of the original authors. So that's no help either. I can publish the errata on ArXiV, but many readers of the original paper will never find it.

Does anyone have suggestions on how to get this correction into the literature?

I'll give a few options that occur to me.

Talk to the editor. Essentially ask him what to do. On the one hand he has a policy he wants to follow, and on the other hand he presumably wants corrections of erroneous papers to appear. After all, the alternative is that someone points the error out in a different venue, and the whole community laughs at his journal. Perhaps he will be willing to bend his rules a bit.

You will need to discuss any possible solution with the editor, anyway, so you may want to start out with the most obvious option.

What's to keep you from writing something titled "Erratum" with the whole list of authors X, Y and Z, but with two sections "1. The Erratum (X, Y)" and "2. A dissenting point of view (Z)"? Yes, of course we want a paper to have a unified message, but in this particular case, I'd say that getting the word out in any way is better than burying the discussion under mounds of policy.
Propose that you write the erratum, but allow the dissenting author to comment on the erratum and explain why he thinks the erratum is erroneous. Then send both the erratum and the comment out to review and see what the reviewers say.
Perhaps you can do the discussion under point 2. above on the ArXiv, but publish an "erratum" with the full author list that does not discuss the error but only points to this discussion on the ArXiv.

One bonus for options 2-4: actually writing up these papers will force everyone to really think about the derivation in question, and either you or the dissenting author may change his mind about whether there is or is not an error.

Option 1 puts the onus on the editor, who may not be very flexible, judging from your question. (Of course, we don't know what he would say.) Options 2-4 are pretty "meh", and involve getting both the editor and the dissenting author on board. So given that these three options involve convincing two people, anyway, it may be worthwhile to look at other solutions involving communications.

How deeply have you discussed the putative error with the dissenting author? It may be easier to convince him that there is an error than to convince both him and the editor to collaborate on a "solution" nobody is happy with.
How sure are you that in fact there is an error? I'd assume the dissenting author is not completely out of his mind, so perhaps he does have a point?

Options 4 and 5 really involve taking the time to discuss the issue in depth with the dissenting author. I'd recommend doing this in person, if at all possible, not via email or the phone. And do this one-on-one with the dissenter, not together with all the other authors - if he perceives everyone else "ganging up" on him, he may become defensive.

Approach this with an open mind. Maybe there is a simple misunderstanding, and the two of you are really thinking of different things when you think you are talking about the same thing. Often you will learn a lot from this kind of discussion. In the best possible case, you will find two different ways of looking at the issue, and maybe even the germ of a follow-up paper.

If all else fails and the editor is in fact an associate editor, you can always escalate the issue to the chief editor.


Scopus: Inclusion of papers I have some papers published in journals that are approved by Scopus. But these papers are not included in Scopus. How can I get get them included?

Once the articles are accepted by a journal, it takes time for coming online. Moreover, your question is unclear and lacks further details such as the following:

Are you sure the journal is indexed by Scopus (have you verified by from Scopus site?)
Whether the article has been published as "online-first"?
Has it been indexed at the least by 'Google Scholar'? -- Usually, Google Scholar is fast in indexing as it directly captures the metadata from the journal site.

For the articles to appear in Scopus page, it will take some more time than Google Scholar takes. There are internal steps that are taken care before indexing the articles in Scopus. It usually takes 3 weeks to 2 months for an article to appear in Scopus (from my own experience), I can't provide data points. Also visit a similar question here.


Switching to academia from industry in a world during/after COVID EDIT:

  Thank you to all those who commented asking for more clarity in the question - it pushed me to think harder. My apologies for a lack of clarity, I hope the community would understand as this is my first time here.

Questions:

Return to academia: How can I prepare myself to get into a research oriented graduate program after spending 7+ years in the industry assuming that university admissions and operations return to normal after COVID-19? If you think it won't, what could change?
Sustaining/excelling in academia: What changes do you anticipate in research job prospects in a post COVID-19 world?

Background:
I hold a bachelor’s degree in Electrical Engineering and currently work as a data analyst. My goal is to be in a place to conduct cutting edge research (and maybe teach as well). I intended to keep my job and pursue an online MS in Computer Science. After a failed attempt of getting into an online program offered by UT Austin, I’m starting to think I should focus on just one thing and go to school full time, without a safety net job (also for the reason that an online program doesn’t help getting into a PhD program owing to research experience).

The current economic climate is unprecedented and I’m quite sure life wouldn't continue as planned. Pursuing graduate education may require that I borrow money which adds additional stress while navigating an economic slowdown. I’m looking for advice from people who went through similar experiences during the ‘08 crisis. It’s not the same, but possibly there are important lessons.

Ok. The path into academia, and especially into a position that emphasizes research, goes through a research doctorate, usually a PhD. With only an undergraduate degree, expect about seven years to achieve it, in the best of times, which these are not. Here are some pros and cons to help you make an informed decision.

First, if you get accepted into a doctoral program in the US, you will probably get a stipend of some form, but usually in the form of a Teaching Assistantship which is something like a quarter to half time position. But it also normally comes with complete tuition forgiveness. People can live on this, but it is harder if you have a family and your spouse isn't employed. Possible.

But, with several years in industry, your expectations about life style might not be especially compatible with such a low income. So, you would probably need to give up something to get something. UTAustin is a pretty big level institution and you would probably find success by casting a wider net.

But, the times in education are very hard right now. Even before coronavirus started to spread, disrupting education everywhere at all levels, the job market in academia wasn't ideal, with people finding it difficult to get permanent (tenure track) positions. There have been more graduates, it seems, than there are jobs. But that can change, both quickly and dramatically.

The coronavirus has made things both difficult and tentative. It is harder to have the direct contact between students and professors that is very helpful to getting a doctorate. In the US, which normally requires quite a lot of advanced coursework past the bachelors degree, it will be difficult in the short term with online classes substituting for face to face instruction.

And, of course, whether you are able to get a position in academia depends quite a lot on yourself and on how you do in a degree program. It is helpful to have an advisor who has a good reputation who can give you a boost in your career, but those same super-star professors can be hard to work with also.

However, if you've stated your motives accurately, then you'd seem to be a good candidate. Don't go into academia for the money. At the end of my career I was well paid, but my friends with similar responsibility in large research organizations like IBM, earned just about twice what I did. For me, it was a good tradeoff since I got to set my own agenda. And, I went into academia in the first place because all other options seemed to be deadly unattractive.

If you want direct advice, I'd suggest you spend a year looking around at institutions and programs of interest and getting financial things in order. Hopefully that will take us past the current pandemic and make planning a bit more rational. If not for the pandemic, I'd suggest starting now. But the crystal ball is very cloudy at the moment.

Update: I doubt that you need to do anything other than apply to get in to a doctoral program in the US. You will need to find letters of recommendation, some from academics, but if your record was good I think you have a chance. Europe requires much more from entering students, of course.

What the world will be like after the pandemic, it is impossible to say, but there will be a strong incentive for academia to return to normal as quickly as possible. Political constraints may get in the way and the economy will take time to recover, but some things underlying research don't change, and likely won't. In many fields, labs are required and expensive. In most fields, face to face research seminars are considered to be superior to the alternative. Momentum has slowed, of course, but the system hasn't been destroyed. There was, for example, a huge growth in higher education at the end of WWII. The system is pretty resilient.

For state sponsored universities in the US, such as UTAustin, the strength of the institution adds to the strength of the economy of the state overall. Without good universities, students and businesses go elsewhere. UTAustin, in particular adds to the special nature of Austin itself.


United States PhD fast-track I'm going to finish my undergraduate degree in June and from September I will follow a masters course in the UK. My field of interest is theoretical/mathematical physics.

I had considered applying for a PhD program in the US but I have observed that most graduate programs require following some masters courses and completing an examination before starting your PhD research. If I had known I would have applied for the whole graduate program but all deadlines were around Christmas. So I would like to ask some questions about this.

I guess this will depend on the specific program, but, would there be a possibility of doing some kind of fast-track?, i.e completing the examinations upon arrival and starting your research immediately. Or will I need to spend a year attending to these courses?
I believe this may be a common issue for European students. Does anyone know somebody in the same situation?

Many departments don't have hard deadlines for the graduate school applications, but they might have some test requirements that you need to take for the school to finally accept your application (i.e., many public universities need a GRE score for all applicants).

In case the departments are fine with it, you can still apply and take the tests in the next month or so, although a lot of departments will start accepting PhD students soon (if they haven't started already).

The tests are usually a general test GRE, a subject test GRE, or the GMAT, but they may vary. Since you're from the UK you don't need the TOEFL english test.

I would suggest to email/call individual professors or departments and ask for more information.

In a lot of cases the graduate student assistants can give you a lot of answers directly since they handle most cases.

Usually departments have a faculty member in charge of the graduate student program. They are also good contacts.

When I applied for my PhD in the states I was still in school in Europe, so I went through a similar situation, although I was done with the standard tests by that December (eight years ago).


At what age do professors stop taking new students? Assuming STEM, At what age do tenured professors stop taking new students?

I am a first year PhD student and have my eye on one professor who seems to be really interesting and I feel he finds me as a good candidate too but for some reason that he refuses to discuss he does not wish to take me in. Most of his current students are 1-2 years from graduating.

I have a strong reason to believe that it's his age (60-65). That's when I thought about the more general question I am asking.

There are no hard and fast rules for this. However, in general, the question is not so much time-after-PhD, but rather time before retirement. Most faculty advisors in the final stages of their careers stop taking students, so that they can wind their research groups down gracefully. Frequently, the last years before retirement will be spent writing and teaching, and mentoring a few additional students. The amount of time depends on the average career of a graduate student in the professor's particular discipline, but somewhere between three and seven years before retirement, the "wind down" will begin.


Why does the Nobel committee not award prize to collaborations? The 2013 Physics Nobel prize went to François Englebert and Peter Higgs, for their discovery of the Higgs boson. I was wondering why the CERN, as an institution, or the ATLAS collaboration, are not co-awarded the price with Englebert and Higgs. Apparently, “collaborations” cannot be awarded the Nobel prize. Is it a tradition, or something written in the rules of the Nobel foundation? Has there ever been an exception?

In paragraph 4 of the statutes, it restricts the price to be only awarded to two works and to a maximum of 3 individuals.
But it also says, that it can be awarded to an institution or organization. Which has been done with the Nobel Peace Prizes to the EU.

A prize amount may be equally divided between two works, each of which is considered to merit a prize. If a work that is being rewarded has been produced by two or three persons, the prize shall be awarded to them jointly. In no case may a prize amount be divided between more than three persons.
[…]
Each prize-awarding body shall be competent to decide whether the prize it is entitled to award may be conferred upon an institution or association.


Having children while at graduate school I am finishing my first year of Masters and have always thought of going for a PhD in North America. I and my girlfriend are going to have a baby which is totally unexpected. The due day will be somewhere this december which I am still half year away from finishing my Masters degree.

I don't know under this circumstance should I still, or am I able to, apply for PhD positions overseas. This would mean I will have to leave them or bringing them together for my study. I am not super rich to afford a family personally and would need to rely on studentships, but I don't think graduate studentships are sufficient to afford the living expense and future education fees of my coming baby.

Taking on a PhD and a research career are definitely my dream and situation seems very difficult for these to come true. Anyone knowing someone carrying kids along grad school, or any suggestion to me? I just don't have a clue how to take care of everything.

Anecdotes are not usually the right kind of answer on stackexchange, but you have specifically asked for them, so here goes...

My experience

I had two children in graduate school.  The first was born during my second year, and the second was born during my fourth year.  Most of my fellow students thought I was crazy.  I graduated (obtaining both a MS and PhD) in five years, with no debt and certainly no regrets.  Surprisingly, I found that graduate school allowed me to be more involved in my children's life than if I'd had a regular job.

Advantages

Some important and perhaps unusual factors worked in my favor.  First, and most importantly, my wife had already decided that after we had children she wanted to be a full-time homemaker.  Her support allowed me to focus on my studies, although I did change hundreds of diapers, stay up a lot of nights, and after the birth of the first I didn't get any research done for about three months (I did continue passing my courses).

The second important advantage I had was generous funding from the US DOE's computational science graduate fellowship (CSGF).  It is (or at least was) the highest-paid government fellowship in the US, at about $33K/year.  That was still officially below the poverty line for a family of four where I lived, and half my income went to rent, but by careful budgeting we had no problem getting by on only that income.  Could I have done it with less income?  Yes, though I would possibly have needed student loans, and the added load of being a teaching assistant would have been a challenge.

Finally, I found that I could get a lot of high-quality research done by focusing intensely for a few hours per day.  For me, that was (and is) a more productive strategy than trying to focus on research 24/7.  This made it possible to complete my thesis and care for my family simultaneously.  I was home by 5-6 p.m. almost every evening and spent most of my weekend time with my wife and children.  I did often do research for an hour or two after my kids were in bed.  I know that many grad students tend to spend a lot more time each day on research, which might make things more difficult.

Assessment

Having children during graduate school was a good decision for me.  The time I was able to spend with them as babies and then toddlers is precious to me.  After I graduated and became an assistant professor, I found that the time I could spend with my children was much more limited, due to the added demands of teaching, advising, service, and administration.  Indeed, with my third child (born 2 years after I got a permanent position) I changed a lot fewer diapers and really spent a lot less time with her early on.  I've reached a better balance since then, but it took years.

In short: with the right setup, having kids in grad school can work out very well.


Shall acronyms in scientific papers be expanded exactly once? There's no way to evade having a lot of acronyms in a scientific paper, often already in the title.

I use the latex package glossaries to automatically expand the first use of every acronym (except usage in the title), but for a scientific paper, I do not include a table of acronyms (for my thesis I do).  In a long paper, if someone does not remember all acronyms or does not read sequentially, it could be difficult to look up the meaning.

If I use a not very well known acronym in, say, line 100, and again in line 500, should I expand it again, or is it a better style to stick with expanding only and exactly once?

First, try to avoid acronyms unless you repeat it frequently.

In the case you mention, occurring twice, an acronym is not warranted. New acronyms may be useful if it is likely that it will be used over and over again, both in your paper and in subsequent ones. It is difficult to say how many repetitions is needed before an acronym may become a viable option.

Acronyms generally make a paper less readable. We all know some like DNA or UN and particularly in the first case the acronym is easier to remember than the actual words. So use acronyms sparingly, be careful about what you abbreviate, and avoid publishing acronyms that only your research group uses unless it starts to become a standard (identified by other people also using it in presentations etc.). I think many acronyms start by it becoming jargon first. Trying to be restrictive is the best measure.


How should I prepare my write-up for an internship program? I am going to apply for an internship programme. It is written that the selection is based on write-up. To apply for the program I need to include an write-up with 1200 words. Also, some outlines of the project is given in the website.
But I am little bit confused. Which things I should include in the write-up? Should I include only "Why I am interested for the program?" or the part which includes what I have read earlier about the topic that I  want to pursue in the internship?
I have no idea.  Please advise me.
Thanking in advance.

You could Include the following (in order) -

A very brief introduction about yourself and the motivation behind working in the field of the internship you are applying for.
Where you have interned/Projects done
The skills developed from point 2.
What you hope to acquire from the internship and how it will benefit you (very short sentences)
An ending touch.


Recommenders that are professors but not co-authors I applied to a junior faculty position in a certain university. They asked me to provide a list of recommenders with the following requirements:

Each recommender should be a professor.
No recommender can be someone with whom I wrote a paper.

The second requirement rules out not only my Ph.D. advisors, but also most professors who know me as a researcher. I thought of several ideas for recommenders that meet both these requirements:

Professors who meet me regularly at department seminars. They can (hopefully) testify that I can ask good questions. But this is only a small part of being a good researcher.
Professors whose courses I took as a graduate student. They can testify that I can learn well. But again, this is only a small part of being a good researcher.
Professors for whom I did some technical work, e.g. computer programming (for research purposes); same comment as above.
Editors of journals for whom I reviewed a paper. They can (hopefully) testify that I can write good reviews; same comment as above.
Editors of journals in which I published papers. They can (hopefully) testify that my papers are good. But, the fact that they published my papers already shows that they think it is good.
Professors for whom I worked as a TA. They can (hopefully) testify that I know to teach. But for this, it may be much more relevant to bring recommendations from students (which I have).

What other options do I have?

People who cite your papers

A particular audience that is suitable for this are people who cite your papers. It is quite likely that the committee wants to see what impact (if any) your research has on your field, so they would want opinions from people outside your team that have read your research and find it useful. One way to find such people is to look at citations to your papers - they (obviously) have read your research, consider it valuable, and you should be able to find their contact information from their papers.


I got caught writing my student ID number after the end of the exam. Will I get in trouble? I had an exam yesterday morning which lasted 2 hours. There were two supervisors in the room for about 25-30 students.

Before the beginning of the exam and again 5 minutes before the end, they told us not to forget to write our name and student ID number on each sheet (we used our own paper to answer the questions of the exam sheet but they had in reserve in case we had not enough), something which was also indicated at the front page of the exam question sheet.

At the end, they told us to stop writing and not leave immediately, that they will now proceed to collect all exams and check that they have all of them, after what we would be allowed leave. To do this, for each student, they stapled his/ her exam question sheet with the other sheets on which he/ she wrote his/ her answers.

Now here is my problem: while they were collecting the exams, I noticed that I had forgotten to write my student card number (not the name) on one of my sheet. So I quickly took my pen and wrote it on the sheet, something that took no more than 2 seconds.

But then, once finished, I noticed that one of the two supervisor was looking at me with an angry frown while the other was stapling a student exam just next to him, so obviously he noticed that I had written something on one of my sheet.

They continued to collect all exams like normal. But once they were near me - I was the last student of the column -, the supervisor who had given me the angry frown collected the exam of the student in the row in front of me (there was one student sitting at each seat row end during the exam) and already directed himself with the pile of exams of our column to the main desk where they were gathering all exams, while the other supervisor was still busy stapling my exam.

So the second supervisor then took my exam alone in his hand. This supervisor then put my exam on the main desk and then put at least one sheet that I could not identify on top of it (so he did not put it on the exam pile of our column), and so I saw it disappear. They then said we could leave and began to sort the exams in alphabetical order (at least that's what it seemed to me they were doing)

So my questions are :

Will I likely get accused of cheating in  a few days?
Did the other supervisor take my exam alone in order to put it on
the side so they can identify who I am?
Should I write a mail to them and explain what I was really doing?
If I really get accused, how should I behave? Should I just tell
them what I was doing even if they of course can not know if I am
lying or not?

I already talked about it with my father, who is a law professor, and he said I am dramatising the entire thing and that if they really wanted to do something, they would not have let me leave the room. Moreover, he said they could not prove anything, especially given that only one of both supervisors noticed what I was doing (and there is no video surveillance in the room). That if I really get called in the office in a few days, I would just need to say that I was writing my student card number, and that's it.

I know this is a bit long, but the more I think about it, the more I think something will happen, so I would like your opinion about that matter.
 Thanks for your help.

You are definitely overthinking this: in the worst case, they wrote down on their report that you wrote something when the time was finished. This could result in you getting your mark slightly reduced to account for the additional time.

I insist that this is the worst case scenario: this is clearly not a case of cheating, in all the exams I attended there are always a few students forgetting to write their student number and adding it at the end, some mistakenly writing their names, etc.

It is actually very likely that what you interpreted as a special treatment for your paper was completely normal. In my experience papers are collected in no particular order.

Take this angry frown for what it probably is: just a warning that you should follow the instructions.


I'm the only grad student who wasn't asked to write a tenure recommendation for my advisor. Should I be concerned? I'm a few months away from defending and my advisor is going up for tenure shortly after I finish. I found out that every other student of my advisor, including a student who graduated a year ago, except for me was asked to write a letter for consideration in the tenure process. One of the students just joined the lab and was confused as to what exactly he was supposed to say. These requests weren't sent out by my advisor, but by another professor on behalf of the tenure committee. (That professor just happens to be on my advisory committee.)

Should I be concerned about this or am I just being paranoid?

If you think there was an oversight, you could always ask the chair of the tenure committee directly if they left you out. Alternatively, you could simply write the letter and submit it to the committee. The worst-case scenario here is that the letter is not forwarded to the committee.


My PhD supervisor want to add his name on a paper from my MSc work I just started my PhD and I was planning to submit a paper from my MSc work to a conference soon. The paper was finished before I join my PhD program.

Now my new PhD supervisor want to add his name and his post-doc name on the paper. He asked me to send the paper for his post-doc to review and then add both their names. Although my previous supervisor already reviewed the paper.

How should I proceed? My new supervisor definitely has no contribution in the paper and feels like he just wants his name on more papers with no regard to how he contributed.

I'm in the social sciences, but I can't imagine that this is a discipline-specific issue. Is your new supervisor pre-tenure? If so, he may be pressured to have a stronger CV and publishing with his post-doc would look extra favorable. Regardless, (from your description) this appears to be an inappropriate request and I'm sorry that you were put in this predicament. I find the fact that the supervisor wants the post-doc to also co-author is especially troubling.

First, I echo that you should find a new supervisor. If there is someone else whose work is close or closer to your interest, you can ask to transfer supervisors and claim this as an academic request and not a personal one.

Second, is your MSc a co-author? If so, you can state that the prior supervisor is the co-author and you do not feel comfortable adding additional co-authors when the previous supervisor put in much of the work.

If not, you can still claim that you did the majority of the work and that if neither your supervisor nor his post-doc have any significant additional contributions to your paper, you do not feel comfortable adding them as co-authors. To further decline with professionalism, you could explain to the supervisor that you have other paper drafts or other projects that you would like to publish and/or present at conferences...if the two are interested in co-authoring you could collaborate on revising something else to publish together.

If your new supervisor is somewhat junior, he may not know that this was inappropriate (I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt), so I would try to be as professional about this as possible. It also might not surprise other faculty or administrators that this person asked you to do this (there are always faculty members here and there who are known to minimize student contribution and credit, though unfortunate).  Good luck!!!


Would a Professor be responsive to a meeting request from a PhD student like this? I am a graduate school applicant and am considering requesting a meeting with a professor while I'll be visiting a city near their university town.

The current e-mail format I have in mind goes roughly as follows:

  Dear Professor X,

  I am a graduate school applicant at University A. Before this I
  graduated from University B and have worked with Professor C* on some
  research projects. I am visiting City D for the next two weeks or so
  and I would be delighted if you could meet with me for a few minutes
  to discuss your latest work on topic E. I've been very interested in
  topic E and have been spending time trying to learn more about it, writing up
  some notes on this and related topics along the way (which you can
  find on webpage F).

  Thanks for your time. (signed, me)

*Professor X has coauthored many papers with Professor C and they still collaborate frequently.

My question is that would you as a Professor be responsive to an email of this nature? What improvements or extra information would you suggest to add that would make you more likely to grant such a request to meet? Is there something in the above which would make you not want to meet?

Other info: I have never had any contact with Prof X before this. Prof X is a big name and an extremely active researcher in the relevant field.

@Penguin_Knight's comment is the best advice in this situation: ask Professor C to introduce you (via email with you in CC) to Professor X and mention that you will be in town and would like to chat.  Professor X may not have time to read all the messages she gets from students and other people she doesn't know, so there is always a chance your message -- not matter how well-crafted -- may be overlooked.  But a message from a coauthor will immediately stand out and is sure to be read carefully.

This is a very natural thing for Professor C to do (assuming she has a positive opinion of you and your work); you should make the request politely but you don't need to feel that it is a huge favor.

If you leave a good impression, this introduction and the subsequent visit will usually drastically improve your chances of admission.


Do author name(s) dominate the content of the paper? Suppose I did not publish any papers till now in reputed journals and I want to publish a paper with a novel idea. Colleagues are suggesting me to ask any expert to proofread the paper and then to include his name as one of the authors. But I don't want to involve any other person and want to do everything on my own and if any revisions are there, I revise my paper according to the comments by reviewers.  In addition to that that are saying that there is a possibility of immediate rejection without seeing the content if authors are new and English is poor.

Some are emphasising that the author names with a good track record can influence the reviewers to fasten the process of reviewing and avoids immediate rejection.

In what you have written, you are confusing together two things:

Is the author known to the reviewers? (e.g., "names with a good track record")
Is the paper well written? (e.g., "English is poor")

While some sub-fields may have "cliques" that exclude people who are not part of them, most reputable scientific publications have a basically honest review process.  Reviewers are human, and so even honest reviewers will tend to look more favorably on a person whose work they already respect---and thus many publication venues have double-blind review to try to eliminate this possibility.

If you haven't published in a well-reputed journal before, however, there's a good chance that your paper will not be well-written. Writing scientific papers is a skill, and that skill takes practice. Moreover, writing well is often much harder if you aren't writing in your primary language.  And even if you write well in general, writing effectively to a particular scientific community requires being conversant with the current state of that community, in order to understand how readers (and reviewers) are likely to think about what you write.

Thus, I would strongly agree with your colleagues that it is extremely useful to get an expert to look at your paper.  I would strongly disagree that means that expert should become an author---merely reading and commenting on a draft is definitely not sufficient for authorship.

If the expert finds problems in what you have written and is interested to become involved, however, it might be very good to begin a collaboration in which they work with you to refine your work and connect it better to the community of interest. In that case, the expert would indeed become a co-author: not because their name is valuable, but because their expertise has helped to improve the paper into something much stronger than it was before.


Does it cost universities less to teach online? As more colleges stay online, students demand tuition cuts
The article talks about students demanding tuition cuts because online classes are less effective, and because lots of things they pay for are no longer relevant (such as campus transport). It notably doesn't say if it is actually cheaper for the university to teach online. If it isn't cheaper, then if the university cuts tuition fees it would have to make up the shortfall from somewhere.
Is it cheaper for universities to teach online than in-person?

Consider the University of California system as an example: of its core funds expenditures, three quarters goes to employees, and most of the rest is student financial aid. Only 6% of the costs go to equipment, utilities, and similar.
Now, some portion of those employees would also become unnecessary if they did away with a physical campus entirely, but most are still needed to operate the organization. In the case of an institution like the UC system, remember also that much of the physical campus is also not devoted to instruction, but to research and other non-instructional activities, and these have continued in many cases (albeit with reduced capacity) through the pandemic.
In short: in the near term, most universities' costs are almost entirely identical while teaching online.  In the long term, even if they shed every physical aspect of instruction, the costs would not go down all that much unless the institution was radically restructured to greatly increase the numbers of students per instructor.


Should I email a potential supervisor who agreed to support me? I am applying for a PhD at a certain university that requires the student to provide and evidence of support from a potential supervisor before submitting the application. After mailing some professors, one of them agreed to support my application. It was a very brief email saying "I am happy to support you". I immediately prepared a research proposal and sent it to her. She replied by saying "Noted". I prepared my application and submitted it two months later.

Is it appropriate to email her as a reminder of myself? If so, what would be a good email? This university is very important to me and I want to do everything I can to increase my chances of admission.

Yes, in general it's entirely appropriate to remind faculty members about letters/recommendations/paperwork they've previously agreed to.

In fact many faculty members I've known (and I cannot, alas, wholeheartedly exclude myself) rely on such reminders to a greater or lesser extent.  Faculty nowadays are faced with so much paperwork / routine correspondence (and are not necessarily trained or culturally aligned to regard such things as being important) that we start to believe also in the converse: what we have heard about once and never been reminded of must not be very important.

Just now I got a second email from a secretary in my department about an annual inventory issue.  She sent the first email just a few days before and included a hard deadline in both emails. In other words, she knows all the tricks to get faculty to do things without causing resentment.  The keys: be polite but persistent, and make the convergence to the deadline clear by ramping up the email reminders accordingly.  It really works: pardon me while I run down to her office so she can tag my laptop!


Difference between Computer Science, Computer Engineering and Systems and information engineering master'sdegrees Good Morning!

I'm a French student graduating this year in Computer Sciences from Paris Dauphine University and I'm applying to master's degrees at the University of Virginia. I was wondering what was the difference between:

Computer Science
Computer Engineering
Systems and information engineering

Reading the handbooks, I understood that the second one was more focused on hardware than the first one. Yet, I have no idea of what the last one was about or where would it lead me.

I'm asking because I'm not sure whether to apply for the second link or for the first one and the second one or for all of them.

Thanks in advance for your enlightenment.

Computer Science is mainly theoretical with a heavy "cutting edge" theory and research focus. This is where you would study things like memory management, compiler design, programming language design, artificial intelligence, etc.

Computer Engineering is mainly hardware focused and is usually a subset of electronic engineering. This is where you learn to design processors and build hardware devices.

Systems and Information Engineering is like Computer Science, but is more "practically" focused - it is more about application to real-world problems, with a focus on information systems. This is where Security often falls, as well as other fields like human-computer interaction, information systems, and other applications that are closer to the user.


Is it important to dress in formal clothing for a postdoc interview? Just curious is it crucial?

It's one of the reasons I like academia that I don't need to care too much the boring stuff like wearing suits.

Personally, I can't think of a single 'genuine' post-doc I've known over the years who had enough mental capacity left to even begin worrying about what to wear.

On a more serious note though, based on my experience within the field of computer science in The Netherlands (seeing as regional differences do matter), taking some care not to pick an indecent or dirty pair of clothes should be the minimum. Suits would be way overdressed.


Can I include just a folder from Zotero into Overleaf instead of my entire library? I am setting up an Overleaf account to work with my Zotero account and ran into an annoying issue.  I have one folder within my Zotero library which contains all the references I want to use in a paper, but Overleaf didn't give me any options when linking to Zotero and has created a references.bib file which contains references to every single source inside my Zotero library.  This is annoying because my library is quite a bit larger than the folder I want to use as my set of references.

  Is there any way to use only a single Zotero folder as a source of references for an Overleaf project?

Thanks for any help or suggestions you may be able to offer!

My approach is to select my folder and then manually select the items that I want to export to Overleaf. That might be the entire folder, in which case I can press Ctrl + A to select all items; or it might be most of them. I then select "Export Items" and upload the resulting .bib file to Overleaf.

You can see an example here (selected all but one item I didn't want to cite):


How to announce a new web-page? Our lab has recently developed a new webpage; we are thinking of ways to announce it's creation via social media and email:

Is there an etiquette for making such announcements?
Perhaps there are example announcements you could share?

If there's a reason for someone to visit your lab's site other than it's new and should be visited, then you could write up a short announcement and post it to a relevant mailing list for your particular discipline or sub-discipline.

Otherwise, the best and most persistent advertising you and your groupmates can do would be to include it as a signature block in your email. People who want to know more about your group can then click on the link. Other methods to generate traffic without purpose will likely tick off more people than inspire them to visit your page.


Can the future career damage associated with staying in the same lab between PhD. and postdoc be offset by massive high-impact productivity? I am going to be finishing my PhD at a top-10 ranked US institution in the next 6 months in a biosciences related discipline. My advisor (and the lab in general) is extremely well known and well respected. I have been very productive in my current lab (10-15 papers in high-impact journals, many additional manuscripts in preparation, invitations to present at 5-10 conferences, and I am well known in the broader research community).

Upon graduation I may be geographically limited to stay in the same city. If I were not geographically limited I would, largely, be able to postdoc anywhere I wanted. This is not intended to sound arrogant, but I want to paint a picture (I have investigated the possibility with a few best case choices and all have responded favorably).

If I stay in the city, I am considering whether to remain with my current advisor or switch labs.

I have many reasons to stay in my current lab: I believe I will be very productive, the research direction is very appealing to me, I have a great relationship with my advisor, I have a lot of autonomy already and my advisor will help me move into a more independent position, and I have had and will continue to have opportunities to spend time at other labs around the world.

There is no one else in this city with whom I'm as excited about working.

However, I'm concerned that if I stay:

I would largely be perceived as a mini-version of my PI. This would hurt funding options in the short and long term (e.g. F32 awards, K-99 awards). Unclear how badly it would hurt them.
My work might all be perceived as my advisors work (though to be fair he is extremely good at explicitly crediting people)
I would not experience a new lab environment
It could be looked on as lazy/unimaginative
It might (would) hurt my ability to get a faculty position later

Is it possible for me to offset the future career damage associated with staying in the same lab between PhD. and postdoc by massive high-impact productivity? Or would my record still be "damaged" by staying in the same place, even if I was extremely productive there?

Massive productivity trumps essentially all considerations. If you're at one of the best universities around, then nobody can be mad at you for not wanting to step down on the ladder either. In other words, I wouldn't worry too much about it.

What I would worry about, both if I were in your place and if I were your PhD/postdoc adviser, is to make sure you develop a profile of your own over time, distinct from that of your adviser. That will mean starting to collaborate with others, writing papers with others and without your adviser, and/or applying for funding under your own name. As long as you make sure that it is clearly visible by the end of your postdoc that you're an independent researcher with your own ideas and identity, you will be fine.


Establishing authority in the classroom What is the best way to establish your authority as the instructor in a classroom?

I am asking from the perspective of a graduate student who will be TA-ing a large class for the first time. But I think similar advice could be said for new assistant professors who still look like students.

The position of TA automatically comes with a certain amount of authority, which is referred to as legitimate power. Having said that, you can increase your perceived amount of authority by demonstrating expertise in the subject area (expert power). Expertise needs to be combined with the ability to actually communicate the complex material as well. It is much harder to communicate complex information than it is to be an expert in complex information.

In addition to these skills, authority can be further enhanced through softer skills such as demonstrating care for the students and providing additional support when necessary (referent power).


If an editor has "recommended acceptance", is that sufficient for me to list my article as "accepted" / "to appear"? I submitted an article to a journal several months ago, and after two rounds of revisions, I have received an email from the editor with whom I've been corresponding, in which they said that the referee is "satisfied with the latest version", and therefore "I have recommended acceptance". Moreover, the editor said that I would receive information soon on uploading the final version of my paper to the journal.

What I'd like to understand is if this is enough to consider my article accepted, so that on my CV, I can list it as "accepted at ___" or "to appear in ___".

In the question When to label paper as "accepted" on your publication list?, the top answer recommends to list an article as "accepted" when one has received the "final acceptance letter", but I suppose I'm not sure whether the email that I received would count as such.

I recommend asking your question directly to the editor.  You can ethically list the paper as accepted precisely if they say that you can, so asking should clear it up entirely.

Perhaps you are worried that asking the question will come off as "pushy" or that it could possibly jeopardize the acceptance of the paper.  But that's not the way the process works -- even if an editor was unprofessional enough to have their decision swayed by an inquiry (and while I have seen lots of things go wrong in the publication process, I have never seen that), this is an especially implausible scenario: after recommending acceptance, the editor would then have a lot of work to do to justify reversing their recommendation, and this reversal would likely make them look bad to the rest of the editorial board.  So there is  no harm in asking.

By the way, I was in the same situation once: the language that I got was cloudy enough so that I really couldn't tell whether the paper had been accepted yet.  I had a grant application due, and I wanted to list the paper as accepted, so I wrote back to ask if I could do so.  They told me I could.


Should my class be more rigorous, and how? I just finished my first semester teaching. The class average was about 88% +/- 9. This seems high to me. The class is normally taken by third and fourth year students. I don't want to push the current grades down, but I don't know if I should make the class just a little more difficult next time I teach it, or how to make it more difficult if I should.
I don't have a lot of information about how the previous professor ran the class, but based on his syllabi I probably covered about twice the number of topics he did. So I assume he spent more time on each topic and covered them in more detail. I don't know how much I could do that, I feel that it's important to introduce the topics I covered, and attempting to add more detail to each topic would take up time I might not have.
Does anyone have any suggestions on how to know if a class if difficult enough, and how to adjust the difficulty?

You are asking the question incorrectly. The grades alone don't tell whether the course is too easy. After all, upper division students have already proven themselves in earlier courses and the ones still there should be better "on average" than those in the first courses.
To improve the question, ask yourself what it is necessary for students to actually gain and know from your course. Ask how you are measuring that. Ask whether the students, by your own measurement techniques actually have demonstrated that knowledge. If the answer is that they are learning the material then giving out lower grades "on average" just disadvantages many of them for no reason at all.
But if their answers on exercises or exams indicate that they aren't learning the material then it might be that higher grades is disincentivizing them to study hard. In that case you need to provide proper incentives. That might be things that lower the average, but it might be other things as well.
For some, but not all students, a bit of "stick" will get them moving. For others, carrots are much more effective.
But the point of it all is learning, not grading. If your grades don't measure learning then you have a bigger problem than you think you do.
But the main question is answered by comparing your syllabus to the requirements of the course and the field and making sure that you are fairly measuring that the students are able to demonstrate competence.
And, if you do conclude that it needs to be more rigorous, then the ways to improve things is to give more assignments, readings, exercises, whatever, depending on the field. Make them harder, require better solutions, etc. Learning requires hard work, just as does excellence in, say, athletics.


How can US universities check whether graduate students work outside TA/RA? Some US universities ban first-year graduate students from working outside TA/RA.

How can US universities check whether graduate students work outside TA/RA?

How can they or how do they?

The chances are pretty slim that a university is able to follow-up on graduate students extracurricular lives.  Perhaps it happens if someone gives them reasons to but it is still very unlikely. The exception to this is within the university system -- I would expect that to be easier for them to do (as pointed out by Jon Custer in the comments).

How can they?  Well, anything is possible. Someone could make this their investigative mission.  They could hire someone like a private investigator.  They could play secret agent themselves and follow you.  These all are possible but unlikely.


What is the difference between "docent" (lecturer) and "Universitair docent" (Asst. Prof.) in the Dutch system? I see many job openings for "docent" or "Universitair docent" on Dutch job boards. Curious, I checked out Wikipedia for more info and, while I learned about the structure there, it isn't clear to me what the differences in the two profiles are. The salary scale is the same, after all.

Also, if I apply for a "docent" position, is it feasible to request that I be considered as a "Universitair docent" in light of my exemplary experience and so on?

"Docent" or "D" or "gepromoveerd docent" is a teaching-only position (or with a minimum amount of research time, like 20%), while a "Universitair Docent" or "UD" is someone who has much more research time (e.g., 40%).
Also, there are much more tenured UD's ("UD met een vast contract") than tenured D's.
After I finished my PhD, I was docent for a year (basically because I did not get an UD position), basically teaching a lot, then I became UD, and now I'm a tenured UD.

While there are some exceptions, a rule of thumb could be that a D-position is a teaching-only and often something temporarily, while a UD position is something that can be potentially permanent and involves research time.