Capitalising terms like “machine learning” and “natural language processing” Currently I’m proofreading my master thesis in computer science.
I am not sure about terms machine learning or natural language processing.
Is it common to write them capitalized?

This question is probably more apt for English Language & Usage SE.

But no, don't capitalize them. They are not proper nouns. Do capitalize "Machine Learning" if it's the name of a journal, or if it is otherwise part of the name of some entity (e.g. the International Conference on Machine Learning), but do not capitalize it when you refer to machine learning as a field.


How to educate bachelor and master exchange students from Asia? I am working at a university in Europe.  We have a great number of exchange students (one semester, year, of multiple years).  I am having difficulties reaching some of these exchange students, especially, it seems, but not limited to those from non-Western cultures (e.g. China and India).  Treating them in the same way that I would treat native Western students is proving ineffective.  I am looking for ways to improve my teaching strategies to better serve these exchange students, and especially those from Asian cultures.

Here are some of the things that I would like help with:

I am having trouble getting them to attend class.  Sometimes it seems that presence at classes and labs causes them some tremendous pain.
They have complaints about the too high difficulty of the courses.
They often prefer to communicate via email. It is very difficult to elicit interaction from them during class or lab.
Communication is sometimes difficult, and when I ask them how I might best help them, some invisible barrier prevents me from discovering a solution.

Note: Although some of these problems are endemic to exchange students (such as a focus on things besides class), the alignment of this, cultural barriers and language barriers are causing me an especially difficult time reaching out to students from Asian cultures.

Thus, I am especially interested in strategies for improving the following metrics for my Asian exchange students:

class attendance
class engagement
engagement with me outside of class
engagement in person, rather than via email.
class performance (grades)

My sample size ~100 of those students in two years. It is not a big sample at all (including my cognitive biases as well). However, it seems that my poor results at improving the outcomes for my exchange students are not unique to me, as my colleagues report a similar experience.

My questions:

What are some strategies to improve my teaching impact for Indian and Chinese exchange students?  This includes improving class attendance, engagement with class and with me, and class performance.
In what ways are their educational systems and culture at home significantly different from those in Europe?

Note: I know that "Asia" is an extremely large place with a lot of strongly different countries, so feel free to limit your answer on India and/or China.

Update

As I state before, there are common problems in the population of exchange students in general. It seems that they are coming for different reasons than study (finding new friends, experimenting with new drugs, investigate different culture ...).  However, I am capable of recognizing and dealing with the popular strategies of Western exchange students: finding ways to abuse rules for their profit, etc.

Unfortunately, my strategies for improving outcomes with Western exchange students are proving ineffective for my Indian and Chinese students.  I do not really understand their behavior.  My questions are mainly about how to gain a greater understanding of their behavior so that I can make all-around improvements to our teacher-student relationship.

Day after edit

According to the excessive number of comments (all of them interesting I have to say), I need to make this clear. I am not saying they are not good students at their universities or in general. I am just unable to work with them in the same effective way as with the local students. So I would like to know the origins of this ineffectively and I would like to utilize different approaches of education to reach their potential (for their benefits).

Stating that they are "awesome students" (at their home) and I am "an ignorant teacher" does not help. I already know this.

I teach at a university in Asia and I could say the exact same thing about our European/American exchange students.

Quite simply, exchange students have very different incentives from regular students. They often convert their grades to a simple pass/fail on their transcripts so they just need to pass the class (we get students from very reputable institutions in the US Canada and Europe, I was surprised to hear about that practice at first). In addition for many of them it’s their first time in a new and exotic location. They want to party and travel. With all due respect, lectures are the last thing on their mind.

Some of the exchange students are hard working, but I would say that they are a minority.

To conclude I think your question has a bit of a cultural bias to it. European students can be equally annoying in an exchange program.

Edit: the question is biased because it seems to attribute this behavior to the students’ “Asian-ness” rather to them being in an exciting foreign country, away from their parents, dealing with a new language and academic practices, and all that within a few weeks. All of the bad practices the question describes can be easily observed in European/American students who come on exchange to my Asian university. Also, lumping together all students from Asia (or even just India/China) is completely inaccurate, and an over generalization of a group of people constituting the majority of humankind. I would suggest that the OP revisit their own beliefs and consider the circumstances under which they observe this group.

By the way, we also get exchange students from China and India. Surprise! they do fine in general, because to them our university/location is not particularly exciting or different! It’s like if an American student had a semester in the UK. Sure it’s different, but a lot of things are the same. Have you considered that option?

Edit 2: (reflecting OP's edit and discussion below)

There are, of course, cultural differences between Students from different cultural backgrounds. By and large, students from China tend to be quieter and ask less questions (this is especially true for female Chinese students in my experience). There are several great suggestions in the comments and in other answers: listen to them, do not be confrontational, try to schedule office hours where these students might feel more free to interact with you.

With all this out of the way: I think that the solutions offered above are not quintessentially unique to handling Asian students. They are excellent approaches to handling any reserved student, regardless of their background.

Moreover, exchange students (American, European, Asian or African) tend to be  more difficult than regular students (as I describe above). This is a far more important factor in this equation than the cultural parameter from my own limited experience.

I think it's great that the OP is looking to improve their teaching, I just don't think that the difficulties have so much to do with cultural differences as they do with the universal difficulties that arise with foreign exchange students.

As an aside, there are some comments in the threads that are very close to sounding like "I'm not racist, but...". In my opinion, that is unfortunate.


My collaborator has asked to be only acknowledged in a paper. Should I make him a co-author? I am writing a paper in mathematics. It relies heavily on a result from a different topic that I phrased, felt that it should be true, but I did not know how to prove that result. I asked someone who works on this different topic to help me with the proof, and he has found a proof for the desired result. Let’s call him Bob.

I would like to thank this person and ask him if he wants to:

be a co-author in the paper,
just be acknowledged in the paper:

  The author wishes to thank Bob for generously allowing him to use his proof of [result].

At the beginning of the proof of the result it will be mentioned that:

  The proof is due to Bob.

Bob says that he would be happy to be acknowledged and does not think that he should be a co-author (unless he can further contribute to the paper). He also mentions that he is not working on my topic and hence not enough familiar with what the paper deals with.

My question is: Which of the two options (1 or 2) should be chosen?
It should be emphasized that the result I have been helped with is critical for the existence of the paper. Moreover, is it okay to submit the paper to a journal as a single author, and ask the editor to have the opinion of the referees on whether Bob should be a co-author or not?

I read Should all authors on a paper be comfortable explaining every aspect of the paper?, I guess that there are differences between mathematics and other topics, aren't they? For example, in brain research people from different topics collaborate and we do not expect that one will understand what exactly the other did, but in a math paper I would expect that every author will understand what his friend did. Or perhaps I am wrong?

The answer depends on how firmly Y has declined authorship.  I don't think it's appropriate to ask the referees to decide on authorship.

You cannot list Y as an author without his consent.  If he has firmly refused to be an author, that is the end of it.
If Y has simply indicated that acknowledgment is a sufficient form of credit, but left the door open to being an author then it's up to you.  I have responded in this way sometimes when I felt my contribution was sufficient for authorship but I didn't want to step on anybody's toes.  I try to err on the side of being generous with credit, so I would say to him

  "I feel that your contribution warrants authorship.  Are you willing to be listed as an author?"

If he still says no, then just acknowledge him.  You can include the statement of how critical his part was in the acknowledgment.

In the comments, there is a suggestion to state in the paper that Y has declined authorship.  I don't think this is wise; it needlessly draws attention and may make people speculate as to why.  If I were Y I would not want that statement in the paper.


What are alternatives to Journal of Theoretical Biology? I am considering joining the recent boycott of Elsevier, however I work with biologists on theoretical/mathematical biology (in particular, evolutionary game theory and population biology). However, It seems like Journal of Theoretical Biology  is the premier journal for technical work in this field, and my co-authors often suggest it.

What are some (preferably, open-access) alternatives to JTB?

There are quite a few journals where you can publish theoretical work in this area. Here are a few suggestions (the distinction is based on my perception and knowledge of what they've published, I'll let others chip in if they disagree):

For more theoretical work:

The IEEE/ACM Transactions on Computational Biology and Bioinformatics (TCBB).
The Journal of Computational Biology.
The Journal of Mathematical Biology.
The Bulletin of Mathematical Biology

For more applied work:

Bioinformatics.
BMC Bioinformatics. (open access)
Algorithms for Molecular Biology. (open access)
PLoS Computational Biology. (open access)

This is not exhaustive of course, and I suggest you discuss these "candidates" with your collaborators.

EDIT: I marked some of them "open access" because they advertise(d) so. This does not mean that the others do not offer that option, you'll have to check.


How important is a deadline for an open post-doc position? I am a last-year phd student, and starting looking for post-docs.

I have seen a very appealing position in a top university, but unfortunately, the application deadline is in the next few days, and I don't have the material time to get the required material (cover letters, CV and so on).

Nevertheless, the deadline seems not very strict, as they literally say:

Applications will be considered on a continuing basis
but candidates are encouraged to apply by November 24, 2017.

Now my question: how important is the 24 November deadline (or a deadline ) for an announcement of this kind? Why to put a date if they will continue to take applications even after? Is it common for post-doc opening deadlines to be postponed?

Certainly we can construct scenarios where being late with an application would hurt you, but whether or not it actually does will probably strongly depend on the pool of applicants available.

In all likelihood the soft deadline means "we won't start considering applications until Nov. 24th, but after that point in time we might select and hire someone". If you want to guarantee that you're given a fair assessment it would be wise to have your application in as soon as possible.

If this is really a match-made-in-heaven, and you're confident that you're just as appealing to them as they are to you, it might be worthwhile to send along your CV and a short cover letter explaining why you are really ideal for this position and giving a specific date by which you'll have a complete application submitted.

Note that they're probably only waiting a couple of weeks at most for any stragglers. Don't plan on applying in January.


Recommendation letter from assistant professor vs professor Which one will be given more importance? A strong recommendation from a new assistant professor or an average recommendation from senior professor?

You will want a recommendation from someone who is familiar with your work and who can speak to your strengths. Overall, I think the content of the letter matters more than the exact person writing it, provided s/he has the qualifications to write the letter in the first place (e.g., a professor or someone otherwise qualified to assess your academic and research work).

If you have had considerable interaction with the new professor through research, class time, et cetera, then s/he would be a good choice for a letter. Probably the only time you may even consider going with the senior professor (and weaker letter) is if the absence of the letter from him/her would be a red flag. For example, if the senior professor was your advisor, most people would find it concerning not to see a letter from him/her.


How to develop experiment to justify construction of a prototype system? I have worked hard for my master thesis project to build a system that uses an already existing algorithm, just in a mobile setting, which hasn't been done before. Because the algorithm is complex, it required a client-server infrastructure. Now, as I said most, of my efforts until now went into building the system of already existing components rather than contributing to knowledge.

Now my question is, how can I use my system and efforts to go more in the direction of a scientific contribution? The problem is if I, for example, simulate data loss over the network, I could have done that without even building the system. So I somehow want to include my real system in the experiment rather than doing a simulation. What would be a good approach that justifies also the construction of my real system?

What would be a good approach that justifies also the construction of my real system?

I don't have a crystal ball, so I can't say anything other than: in some fields, in addition to showing that your approach works well in a simulated environment, it is a really good idea to also show that your approach works well in practice.

If your peers value such "real world" results, then you don't need to justify it any further than that.


Worries because I'm slow in understanding course materials and my mind goes blank in exams I am undergraduate in Computer Science and my problem is that i don't quite understand what's wrong with me

When I am taking a course I am able to understand it but at much slower rate then other students which results in me taking 2 or 3 courses instead of 5 or 6 that i should be taking, also I have to go in deep details for every subject to be able to understand it and this is very time consuming because it requires alot of research.
I have also noticed that my fellow students are able to read much quicker and to understand what the Author is telling them, while I often need much longer just to read the page plus I have to read it couple of times to actually understand the Author and i often get it wrong (I often get wrong what the Author actually means i.e I often interpret it the wrong way) and I am like slower at everything writing, walking, thinking, solving
And the most devastating part is that after the exams I forget everything literally everything as if I never learned it, this is very demotivating especially knowing that in order to get my degree i have to demonstrate my knowledge from the past too.

Am I mentally retarded or just stupid (like IQ bellow 80 or something) has anyone had similar experience ?

Even if I make it will I have any chance in the workforce?

No. You are definitely not retarded.

You mention that you spend a considerable amount of time going into deep research on every subject. Indeed one of the skills you develop (or should strive to develop) during the course of your studies is to adopt a more pragmatic approach and understand when do you need to understand every detail and when do you need to only understand things at a high level. I had a similar experience to yours so I know that this might sound to you like cheating/impostering, but the reality is that with the sometimes overwhelming load that you are faced with during your studies (and will keep facing in your future academic or professional life) you routinely need to evaluate if the gain in your overall performance from this additional rigorousness will indeed justify the amount of time you will invest in it, often at the expanse of other tasks.

Two things that helped me personally to control this tendency are:

Studying with other students. This can help give you some feedback on whether it is indeed vital to go into that level of detail on that particular task.
Deciding in advance how much time I'm going to dedicate to a specific task. This is indeed challenging and might also be stressful at times, but knowing you have this time constraint can help you to prioritize what are the most vital elements of each task.

Another equally important point: from your description it sounds possible that you might have ADHD or some other learning disability. I recommend that you will approach the unit in your university in charge of supporting students with learning disabilities. They will be able to advise you how to optimize your learning process and help you get additional assistance that you may be entitled for.

Last but not least, have faith in yourself! the fact that you are taking such a challenging program and are studying diligently and the very fact that you asked this question shows that you are capable!


Why do journals ask authors to classify their submissions using taxonomy or a list of topics? I am submitting a paper and the submission requires a taxonomy or topics . I am not sure about this requirement. Taxonomy with respect to a research paper

A taxonomy or topics will help the editor to find proper referees.


Mentioning Professors in math PhD applications When applying to grad school, is it a good idea to mention professors you want to work with? For example, "I am applying to this program because University X has leading experts in the field Y, such as Professor Z. I studied some of Professor Z's papers and would like to learn more about this particular topic in field Y."

EDIT: In addition, what if I were to email Professor Z to ask if he is taking students (in order to avoid an awkward situation where the Prof is leaving/not taking students)? For example, "Dear Prof. Z, I am applying to University X for grad school and I am interested in field Y. I am wondering if you are taking any students at this time, or if there are other researchers in field Y that are taking students?"
Also, is it normal/not awkward for a math phd applicant to email a professor?

This practice is likely, on average, to help more than it hurts.  It does mark you as somewhat more knowledgeable than the typical applicant, and somewhat more focused.  It also ties your name to Professor Z's.  Should Professor Z want you as a student, and should he or she be able to exert influence, that will give your application a huge likelihood of admission.

However, if Professor Z is politically unpopular or hated in the department (or by the admissions committee), this may actually hurt your application.  Further, if Professor Z is unimpressed with your file, then you might be rejected even if otherwise you would be accepted.

Mentioning a research area can only help, provided that the department is actually strong in that area.


Manuscript status changed from Review in progress to Ready for review After two months the status of the manuscript under review changed from review in progres to ready for review. I dont understand is my paper yet to be reviewed? Dont know the workflow of River Valley Review.

Just a guess, but a reviewer may have backed out so they are back to square 1. Probably no reflection on the paper. It may also been that the editor wasn't satisfied with the review he/she got so started over. Reviewers get busy just like authors.

Another possibility is that the editor got back inconsistent reviews.

Be advised that dealing with publishers can be very frustrating. Not the finest aspect of the academic life.


When should a student attempt unsupervised research? I just finished my masters and am currently working as a research assistant before starting a PhD in applied mathematics. I was doing some preliminary work for a possible project and derived some minor results which I find interesting, but in the end, we decided not to go ahead with the project.

I still find the minor results interesting and thought of digging a little bit deeper by myself. However, since the group is no longer interested in this, I would have to do this by myself, unsupervised. Is this a very bad thing? Or a good learning experience?

I had a bad experience doing unsupervised research (wasted a lot of time for no results). However, I know that as a PhD student, I must eventually publish first-authored papers. How do I know when to make the switch?

It is a common thread - see "Go rogue too soon/too late" in 10 easy ways to fail a Ph.D. and Going Rogue at The Chronicle of Higher Education. An excerpt from the first:

The advisor-advisee dynamic needs to shift over the course of a degree.
Early on, the advisor should be hands on, doling out specific topics and helping to craft early papers.
Toward the end, the student should know more than the advisor about her topic. Once the inversion happens, she needs to "go rogue" and start choosing the topics to investigate and initiating the paper write-ups. She needs to do so even if her advisor is insisting she do something else.
The trick is getting the timing right.
Going rogue before the student knows how to choose good topics and write well will end in wasted paper submissions and a grumpy advisor.
On the other hand, continuing to act only when ordered to act past a certain point will strain an advisor that expects to start seeing a "return" on an investment of time and hard-won grant money.
Advisors expect near-terminal Ph.D. students to be proto-professors with intimate knowledge of the challenges in their field. They should be capable of selecting and attacking research problems of appropriate size and scope.

Personally, I have a lot of experience with unsupervised research (yes, usually wasted a lot of time for no results), starting from high school.
Sure, doing advisor's project is much safer (as, in some sense, (s)he is responsible for the big picture, references, judging which result is good enough) and allows to forget about doubts (for good or bad) and concentrate on work.
However, what I've discovered after 1.5 of my PhD (mostly "going rogue") is that there are two important things:

asking experts (or peers), and
day-to-day collaboration.

Sure, you can have an expert and a collaborator in the same person of your advisor, but as long as you are not afraid of talking to other people and have some knowledge in the topic, it shouldn't be hard to ask experts appropriate questions.
When it comes to collaboration - it may be trickier (but not if you locally have people with an interest overlap).
On contrary, working alone for months on a theoretical problem, with little feedback, may be very hard (both technically and psychologically). I've learnt it the hard way. It is not a problem for one research line, but it is when all research is done alone (may be inefficient and depressive, perhaps unless you are in a deep love with it).


Finding (correct) citation info for math references I've just recently learned about BibTeX, rather than manually making a bibliography at the end of everything I write. Now I'd like a reliable source for the citation info.

At school I can use MathSciNet through my university's account, but at home I cannot access that. I have been using Google Scholar to find citation info in BibTeX format but I find that very frequently the year listed is wrong, so I need to dig up the article and double check everything. Just to take the most recent example Lectures in Hyperbolic Geometry by Benedetti and Petronio is listed as having been printed in 2012, but in my copy of the book it says 1992.

Perhaps it is giving me dates of reprints or something, but that is no good either. Having the date of the original publication is important when surveying the historical context of one's work, which is especially relevant to what I'm writing lately.

Is there a more reliable database for BibTeX-formatted citation info on math articles, which can be accessed for free?

For mathematical articles I'm not aware of any citation database of (nearly) as good quality as MatSciNet --- your university is probably also paying a significant subscription fee for it.

As Paul Garrett already mentioned, you can probably access it from home via your university's library. There is actually an even simpler method (at least with a laptop): while at your university you can "pair your device" to automatically have access under your university account for 90 days, when you need to repair it. See the green/blue icon in the top-left corner of MathSciNet, linking to http://www.ams.org/pairing/pair_my_device.html

If you have a desktop at home, you might also do this though a VPN or library site of the university, and then you're set for the next 90 days.


Immatrikulation and PhD in Germany Do PhD students (who work as research/teaching assistant and get paid according to the TV-L E13 bracket) in Germany get an official student enrollment from the university 'Immatrikulation'?

Depends. At my university in Germany, you could choose yourself if you want to enroll or not. Some enrolled, e.g. for the cheap bus ticket and student lunches, other didn't. But there is no general rule for that, every university or even every institute might have its own regulations.


Responsibility/ethics of startups during graduate studies It's a common meme that people often embark on and develop business projects while in graduate school. However, it's unclear how frequently this actually happens in "real life".

More importantly, how responsible/ethical a choice is it, in say, a funded PhD program? I know that typically there is a guideline for hours worked for such a position, but that's almost a joke in comparison to implicit requirements like standards of research quality and publication rate.

Assume that you are a student earnestly engaged in both the PhD topic and an unrelated side project, and you want both the PhD and the business to succeed (i.e., graduate, publish, launch side project as successful startup). To me it seems like the worst-case scenario in that situation would be running into a tough problem in research, while still putting in occasional hours on the side project, as that would look terrible.

I'd also like to hear about the details. How/when to disclose? How to maintain rapport with advisor? What are the ethical concerns? Is this feasible? How do these goofballs in the success stories get away with this? ;)

Well, I did something like that, and I must say it eats up all your time. As said in one of the comments, it is only likely to succeed, if there is a close relation between thesis and company, otherwise you won't find enough time for both of them and fail.
If your thesis is closely related, you should inform your advisor very early in the process, because most advisors think all ideas emerging from their institution are their ideas or at least inspired by them. Despite of that, a good advisor could open some doors and be of help.

Legally, you might even be forced to do this (depending on the situationin your country), e.g. in Germany most contracts do not allow side business without anouncement to your employer. Of course, as long as it can be considered a hobby, noone can sue you for that.

You do a great job if the PhD-programm can sell it as a success story, because their funded project resulted in a new start-up.


What more should I do to increase admission probability to a top math graduate program? Everyone learned in high school that admissions to top colleges for undergrad is not a meritocracy because there are simply too many qualified candidates and not enough spots. After getting rejected from 9 top colleges and having to go to a state school, I knew that that at least would change for graduate school because achievements in college are easier to compare, harder to fake, and represent real effort. But now I have to question this belief given how acceptance rates are below 10% and taking tough courses, having a high GPA, and having great recommendations doesn't set you apart from the average applicant. So I wish to know what I could do that I'm not already doing or planning to do. To that end, here is a list of some things I've done:

Courses taken by the end of this semester: MATH 340, 341, 403, 410, 411, 432 on this list, and STAT600, AMSC466. A+ in all courses so far.
Established a good reputation with one professor after excelling in a seminar and a few math competitions, these being organized/proctored by him. Still need one more reputation like this to have 2 strong letters.
Joined a directed reading program, currently reading through Graph Theory by Diestel.
Published papers in high school journal and on arXiv.
4.0 GPA, more than half of credits towards degree done.
By the end of this semester, will have satisfied all requirements outside math except for one writing course, and will have satisfied all criteria about specific math courses or topics. Thus, I have time to take plenty of graduate courses and the freedom to choose.

Here is what I'm planning to do:

Summer 2021 REU. Didn't get into any REUs this year, probably because I only applied to several programs and had just one recommendation letter.
Do even better in math competitions, simply for the fun of it.
Take math subject GRE sometime in 2021 just to get it over with. I looked at a few practice tests and the questions look easy even once the time constraint is taken into account. However, I will still officially time myself on a few tests just to not let my guard down.
Take more graduate courses, graduate with math department honors, and maintain a high GPA.
Ask professors interesting questions outside of lectures so that they remember me. An instructor for a course I did very well in last fall told me he wouldn't be able to provide a good letter because interaction outside class was minimal (I never went to office hours or sent an email). This strategy should make me more than just a student who showed up to lectures and got good grades.

Is there anything significant I'm missing that would make me stand out among the applicants to top PhD programs? I heard that students from lower ranked colleges are expected to have higher statistics, but my academics with regards to grades and course offerings already seem to be maxed out, leaving only the option of making muself look better outside of courses.  Surely the answer isn't to just continue doing what I was planning on doing given how competitive admissions are in the 21st century. These lists aren't complete, so a correction will be made if someone I already had in mind is mentioned.
A note about time: I should be on track to graduate spring 2022. If I don't get into a good math program for fall 2022, is taking an extra semester or 4th year and then reapplying for spring/fall 2023 a good idea?

I have some very serious doubts about your first few sentences but ignoring those, I can say it seems like you're in really good shape. To add to your list (as a math graduate student myself) really focus on your GRE. A good GRE score will not help you that much but a bad or mediocre one can certainly hurt you. This is something you definitely can study for and you should aim for as high as possible since you have time to study.
Also, you might want to consider the area of research you're showing interest in. I have no idea if what I'm about to say is actually true but I think PhD positions are awarded based on funding availability and if you are interested in a "popular" area you might have an easier time getting in. In this case probably funding for applicable fields is more than funding for purely abstract fields.
If you can publish more papers as an undergrad that will definitely make you stand out because it shows you can do original research and are less likely to drop out of grad school. Getting involved with projects with your current professors is also a good way to get good letters. The vast majority of graduate students I know did not have any publications when they were undergrads. Having publications shows the school is not taking a big risk on you since many students with good grades are not very good researchers.
I also just want to say, that it seems like you're focusing a little too much on the ranking of the school. You should also consider what kind of math you want to do. I spent a semester as an exchange student at one of the top math programs in the world although my own program is not nearly as highly ranked. The students there were really stressed out, competitive rather than collaborative, and not very happy. Burnout is not uncommon there. This made me appreciate my department a lot. If you are interested in an academic career, you should focus on preparing for a long and fruitful publishing history which means doing deep, interesting, influential research that will land you good jobs in the future. That outcome has a lot to do with a) having an advisor who supports you, guides you, and opens career doors for you and b) having time to dedicate to research. In addition to the ranking of the school also consider whether there are professors you want to work with there and the teaching load you will be expected to cover. You may want to contact a professor's graduate students and ask what their experience has been. Most of the time we will be happy to give you honest insight. Also if you are spending all your time running calc workshops, you can't do much research.
Along those lines, go to as many seminars as you can in your undergraduate department. This will give you a better idea about modern research directions and you will be able to write a more coherent statement of purpose.
Consider applying to an NSF grant for early career grad students if you are a US citizen, or find similar grants in your country. https://www.nsf.gov/funding/pgm_summ.jsp?pims_id=6201
Lastly as for your comment about taking more time instead of graduating early: I don't see any reason you should rush getting out of your undergraduate institution if you didn't get into the perfect grad school so yeah, I think it's a good idea to take an extra year and improve your application while taking more classes.
Edit to address what you can get out of seminars as an undergrad: This obviously depends a lot on who you are and what you are studying. First of all, even experts often don't understand everything or even most things in a seminar talk because mathematicians are generally very specialized. Here are some methods I employed as an undergrad and still use during talks:

When you go to a talk, aim for an understanding of the point rather than the details.
During the talk, make a list of words you don't know and look them up after the talk.
I found it very enlightening to read the oldest papers in English I can find about the subject. For example, I just went to the Wikipedia page about the Eichler-Shimura isomorphism which I have never heard about before, and downloaded the earliest paper in English I could find on the internet. It was this one: https://www.ams.org/journals/tran/1961-100-01/S0002-9947-1961-0140126-3/S0002-9947-1961-0140126-3.pdf Even though this is nowhere close to my field, the paper actually did an okay job of describing the motivation of the field. Humans are social creatures and this is what makes math difficult for many. It really helps to know the history and the stories behind any topic before jumping in. If you can research some of that history then the problems in modern math will have a lot more pull. For example, the subject you mentioned seems to have something to do with isometries of the hyperbolic plane. This is a great place to start for an undergrad. If you try really hard to understand each talk I guarantee you will come away learning a few things and after a year of talks, you will have some idea of modern research problems. This will help you begin to develop your overall interests as a researcher.
Also don't expect yourself to understand too much. You want to know is this a classification problem? Is it a generalization of something? What are some applications? The goal is to just learn some new things each time. You're not going to be able to stuff all of algebraic geometry into your head before hand but you can learn the basic motivation and see what piques your interest.


Is there a standard way of referencing line numbers in a draft? I'm reviewing a manuscript with a two column layout that has line numbers on the left margin of the page, but not on the right. Like this:

How do I efficiently and effectively reference a particular line in the manuscript? Is there a standard way of doing it?

Currently I write "P1 C1 L12" to refer to page 1, left column, line 12.

Use whatever protocol you like, but explain your protocol to the editor and authors.  For example, you could include something like the following (quoting from someone else's review of one of my own papers):

  Throughout this review, "p.5(17)" refers to line 17 on page 5.


Letter of Recommendation Etiquette: Asking Only for Certain Schools I have looked around at some of the questions regarding letters of recommendation and can't seem to find one specific to my situation. I am currently applying to graduate school in math, and some of the schools I am applying to require 3 letters of recommendation, while others ask for more. Is it considered rude to ask a professor for letters to the schools which ask for more recommendations and not for others? I don't want it to seem as if he was my `fourth choice' so to say. If not, what is the best way to phrase this to the writer? Thanks!

There is no need to explain to the LOR writers that their letters will only be used for programs that require more than three letters. Ask them for a LOR as you normally would. Provide them with the info they need to write the letter: a list or the programs they need to send their letters to, your transcript, your resume, what you hope the writer will emphasize in their letter, etc. as usual. You do not need to tell them the other programs for which their letters will not be needed, nor do you need to elaborate on where they stand on your "ranking system."

Also, it is perfectly okay to have someone as the "fourth choice", as you put it. When you need four letters inevitably some potential writers will know you better than the others. The fact that someone doesn't know you the best is in no way a judgment of your (or your professor's) ability, and I'm sure your letter writers will understand this.


Overlapping post-doc positions I have a 3 year post-doc position at University A and also have been offered a 3 month post-doc position at Research Institute B. To be precise, the invitation letter from B is worded as follows:

  We would like to invite you to spend three months at Research Institute B. For your research work in collaboration with the mathematical community at our Institute, we will offer you a monthly research grant in the amount of XXXX. By accepting this grant you do not become an employee of Institute B.

The position has a flexible time so I can go for any continuous period I like. I would like to accept the invitation and go during the summer so that it doesn't conflict with my teaching duties at A. However there will be a period of about one month of overlap. My idea is to commute during this month, as I only have to teach one day a week at A, and no teaching at B; and it's about a 5 hour train ride. So I could spend about 3 days out of 5 at B and the other two at A, for the period of overlap.

My question is: is it ethical for me to do this? Would I get in trouble with University A or Institute B, if either found out?

I have heard of someone doing something similar, but I don't know the details of how that worked, so I want to be sure that I wouldn't get into trouble for this.

As a department chair at a US university who has on various occasions negotiated these sorts of overlapping/adjacent postdoc arrangements with job candidates, I can tell you that at least in the US (and, I strongly suspect, in many other countries) it would be considered highly unethical to set up an arrangement of this sort without informing and getting the agreement of the directors/department chairs at both institutions A and B, and is very likely to get you into trouble if you are found out (an event which itself seems quite likely, although that is harder to estimate), with possibly very bad consequences for your career. You can be sure that the negative financial effects of those consequences (even assuming money is the only thing you care about, which probably is untrue) would be of a much greater order of magnitude than the extra money you are trying to squeeze out of your third month of stay at Institution B. And keep in mind that this is not just an ethical matter -- at my institution specifically you would certainly be violating some institutional policies, even if in a practical sense you would still manage to meet your teaching obligations. If you are somehow thinking that "it is better to beg for forgiveness than to ask for permission", please trust me -- this is not a situation where that saying applies.

In short, DON'T DO IT. Bring the department chairs and/or faculty mentors on board and see how they can help you achieve your goals. As I said, in my department we occasionally try to help postdocs combine their stay at my university with another short-term visit to another institution, and recognize that this can work to everyone's benefit, but it must be done honestly and with the full knowledge and cooperation of all involved parties.


How do NSF Graduate Fellowship panelists feel about images in the personal statement? How do NSF Graduate Fellowship panelists feel about images in the personal statement?

I'm applying to the NSF Graduate Fellowship for the first time. None of the successful personal statements I have seen so far have included images. I can't tell if this is because few applicants choose to include images or if it is because the applicants who do choose to include images are unsuccessful.

I know visuals would take away word space, but I feel they would add to my statement (and maybe break up the overwhelming monotony of type). Specifically, I would like to discuss how I use visuals and technology to engage non-scientists with science and to get scientists from other fields interested in my own. I'd like to show an interactive, laser-cut display I did for my university's Arts Festival as well as 3d models I printed for a conference. I kind of also want to include an old picture of me as a child in my mother's graduation cap because it is adorable and relevant to my personal statement but perhaps that is too irrelevant.

If I was a panelist, I think I would be bored out of my mind looking at endless text regardless of how interesting it was. But then again, I'm a very visual person.

First of all, I am assuming that you checked and figures are allowed.

If this is the case, I don't see any reason why having a figure would globally be received negatively. I think it very much depends on the content of the figure, and whether it is justified (given that you are losing some text space). Personally, if I would review this and see a figure, I would not be biased against it in any way (if anything it might show creative/out-of-the-box thinking).

So the main thing is to use the figures wisely. To me, this means that it contributes something significant that would be difficult, or too long, to convey with text. I do not know the details of your entire application, so I cannot say whether what you propose is relevant, but it sounds to me like the first figure (the technological one) might be ok, while the other one (photo of yourself as a child) seems irrelevant and that may hurt your application.

This also means that you should probably consult with someone who knows all the details to get a second opinion with regards to what is a relevant figure and what is not.

Finally, just a technical tip: I would try no to make the figures not too large, since if you can convey the same information with a smaller figure then you are effectively wasting space, and that looks bad.


As a professor, can I copy exercises / problems from a textbook without referencing the source? In creating a final exam for my course, I would like to use problems from a textbook that I did not assign to the course. Do I need to reference the source on the final exam paper or is it not necessary?

I have never seen a university exam in which problems are cited to sources.  The vast majority of exams I've seen are intellectually derivative on other sources: for many courses, an exam which is not intellectually derivative would be difficult to write and very painful for students to take.

In my opinion, in current academic culture course exams are not viewed as academic works which are subject to the standards of plagiarism: there is no pretense of originality.  However, copying exams from standard sources has issues other than intellectual priority: as already mentioned, it may give an advantage to students who are consulting those sources.  In my opinion, it is a good practice when writing an exam to never copy a problem wholly and directly from a standard source.  A question can always be reworded.  For a large array of problems in STEM fields, parameters can be adjusted or other incidental features changed, creating a problem that to a sufficiently expert eye looks isomorphic to the textbook problem, but is different enough so that someone who would feel that way has mastered the material.

When I write undergraduate exams, I usually do so with my own study materials and exams given in past iterations of the course in view (and I also give these to the students, in most cases).  With this in view, I try to create an exam which has the right amount of similarity to past exams and review materials: neither too much nor too little. For intermediate undergraduate level math courses, I have found that having one problem or part of a problem be basically identical (though somewhat reworded) to something in the study materials has a positive effect on the course: as the students run through several midterms and the final exam, they learn that the study materials are actually to be carefully studied and mastered, which increases their learning.  In general I find that changes that I regard as relatively modest -- e.g. swapping out one problem for a "cognate problem" -- are often regarded as "completely different" by students.

In short: you can and probably should use other sources for inspiration and calibration purposes when writing an exam, and I have never seen anyone document their sources as if an exam were an academic paper.  (In most cases one would not be documenting the "true author" of the work but simply identifying the previous person in the borrowing chain.)  However, you should not blindly copy problems from other sources, and you should watch carefully to ensure that your students regard your exams as having a sufficient amount of novelty.  To do otherwise is to shirk one of the most basic duties of the course instructor.


Does the authors opinions or solutions to the reviewed problem have to be inculded in a review paper? I have submitted a review article and one reviewer stated "Authors should propose their solution(s) in this topic based on the analysis of different literatures."
So my question is: it is really required (or expected) to include suggestions on how to solve the research question tackled by a review article? I have read numerous reviews (in journals of good reputation) that were just a collection of findings from the reviewed references, with very little opinions from the authors added. To provide solutions would in my oponion require research that authors of review papers might not have done (yet).
So is this reviewer right to ask for this addition to the paper, or would it be ok to decline the request (and if so, with which justification)?

I agree that the request seems odd, but I haven't read your paper. For many things no real "solution" would be possible. For others, it might be. Think about the request and see if there is something that is worth saying in the paper, but it might just be that a note to the editor that the request isn't really possible to fulfill in the current context might be enough.
It is possible that the reviewer is inexperienced, but it is also possible that the reviewer is very experienced and sees something that you haven't noticed. So, it is worth a look.


Entering Name With Accents on arXiv I'm trying to submit a paper on arXiv, but I can't figure out how to enter my name with accents.
It's supposed to say "Dörr", but arXiv turns it into this:
Image
I tried to enter the UTF character directly and also tried to use the latex syntax for accented characters, as described here.
Using a different browser didn't help either.
On the same site it says "make sure [...] that any accented characters are properly represented", so it has to be possible to enter them.
Any ideas? It can't be that difficult.

I contacted the arXiv support, here's their reply:
"This is actually something we manually fix later in the process, after you submit. Our legacy perl based system does not handle utf gracefully. If you proceed with the submission as is or with Tom D\"orr we will change it to Tom D\"orr in the metadata so that it will be displayed correctly.
We are also in the process of updating our code base to python/flask that will support utf."


How to write an apology letter for a professor? A couple of months ago, I defended my Master's thesis and got graduated. One of the referees, a professor of mine with a history of verbal contentions between us, did me an overt injustice and despite all my efforts, attacked me with her unfair judgement. I got angry and sent her an e-mail the other day, one could say explicitly offensive and disrespectful, implying her lack of knowledge and her biased criticisms. I also commented on her wasting too much time in social networks, rather than doing academic research.

I may have gone too far obviously for I heard she burst into tears after reading the e-mail, and has notified almost all other professors about it.
As a professor, do you still believe I have a chance to apologize the lady and ask for her forgiveness? If in her shoes, would you expect an apology e-mail or you'd prefer no more words from the arrogant student? If yes, what would you prefer to hear in the regret letter? And do you evaluate my reaction as provocative?

one could say... implying... I also commented on... I may have gone too far... do you evaluate my reaction as provocative?...

Perhaps you're being a bit lenient on yourself?

I think the only right thing to do is to apologize, in person, and own your awful (truly awful!) behavior. You didn't perhaps offend and disrespect her, you absolutely offended and disrespected her. In my opinion, you were completely out of line (and unprofessional to boot.) Regardless of the opinion of others (including my own), I think you need to deal head on with this problem you have of lashing out at others for (real or perceived) slights. Part of dealing with a problem behavior is dealing with the consequences.

People are more likely to forgive an offense if the offender has actually apologized and asked for forgiveness. Though she may continue to harbor some residual ill-will towards you (and deservedly so), it will show the community to whom she belongs that you at least tried to do the civilized thing after exhibiting such poor judgement. Also, it will likely stop her from continuing to bad-mouth you if you have apologized appropriately. It doesn't sound good to the listener if she complains bitterly about you, then ends with, "...and then he apologized appropriately."

Don't send a letter or an email. Have the courage to do it in person, and to allow her the opportunity to tell you what you probably need to hear. It might also help you to read about real apologies lest you continue in the vein which started this.

However, if you want her continued ill-will and bad-mouthing to follow you around the start of your career (it may or may not hurt you, you never know), do nothing, or better yet, continue to ignore the better angels of your nature, and tell people she had it coming to her.


Dr.rer physiol. title in Germany I am a future PhD student here in Germany and I am worried about whether the PhD German title (Dr.rer.physiol.) will be accepted internationally in general and in Germany in particular. In fact here in Germany there are many different titles that is possible to get after the PhD, the most common is Dr.rer.nat (literally, Doctor in natural sciences), but then You can be also Dr.rer.med, or Dr.rer.phil, Dr.ing. or whatever (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_doctoral_degrees_awarded_by_country).
But my question is; which is the relevance of one or another title?
Could be really make a difference get one instead of another?
I am really wondering about because there are not really clear info on this topic and I would like to know what is better for my future career!

Thanks a lot
I am looking forward to any answer!
Marta

The part of the degree after the "Dr." indicates the discipline in which you obtained your degree. Depending on potential future employers, it can be an important signal about your technical qualification. Especially university department can be quite selective in choosing only candidates with the "right" type of degree for post-doc or faculty appointments. It may also play a role in some industry positions, but probably to a lower extent.

Many university departments offer only a single type of degree - engineering departments the Dr.-Ing., natural science and mathematics departments the Dr. rer. nat., and so on. Sometimes there's multiple degree options in one department - in that case mostly the area that your supervisor is supposed to work in will determine which degree you can be awarded.

It seems the specific degree you are looking at, the "Dr. rer. physiol.", is a degree from a medical department. Doctoral degrees in medicine, traditionally the Dr. med., are a special case in the German academic community since they typically require much less work (a year) compared to other fields (three to six years). Therefore, graduates with a Dr.med. degree are often not perceived as fully qualified scientists, especially in international contexts (see e.g. the German Wikipedia article on Dr.med. degrees) for a short discussion of this point). On the other hand, many people looking for medical treatment would see any practicing medical doctor who does not have the Dr. med. degree as not fully qualified. And as far as I am aware obtaining the Dr. med. degree also requires that you get the full training as a practicing medical doctor, so it's not suitable for example for scientists with a biology or chemistry background who just want to do research in medicine.

In order to cope with this dilemma, the medical departments in Germany have introduced a range of additional doctoral degrees, among them the Dr. rer. physiol. (see www.zeit.de/2009/43/C-Doktor-Med for an article on that). The common feature of these degrees is that they don't qualify you as a practicing medical doctor, but on the other hand they hopefully will require more research work than the Dr. med. degree, and in this way qualify you better as a scientist. Nevertheless, if there is the alternative to get the Dr. rer. nat., it's maybe a safer way career-wise to go for this more traditional natural science degree.


How can I make the most of this opportunity? Any suggestions for a 2nd/3rd year student interested in research? I am currently a student about to come towards the end of my 2nd year at University. I had a great professor at the start of the year, and I was interested in trying something outside of traditional studies. I approached him and asked whether I could start trying out some research and whether he would supervise and guide me. He agreed and even provided some nice topics.

We've decided on a topic and I'm ready to get started.

Question. Does anyone have any general advice for me, so that I can make the most of this opportunity? What types of skills should I aim to pick up? With what attitude should I approach this research to make it as fruitful as possible?

I am only just starting research, so I don't have a lot of background behind how it works, and what are some ways of getting familiar with a given field? Any useful websites or ideas are appreciated!

What would be a reasonable goal? Publishing a paper?

Would publishing a paper require actual new mathematical discovery, or for a start would compiling together various core theorems and ideas and re-proving them from different existing papers count as well?

Thanks!

Keep in mind, I'm not in math, so I'm not sure how much a lot of this will apply.

I think if you're just starting out and trying to learn the ropes, I think an important first step is to get a feel for what research looks like in your field so that you're better positioned to conduct your own research independently in the future. If I were guiding a student in my field, I'd want them to understand: 1) how are papers structured in our field, and what type of information is generally included in most papers? 2) how does new research critically examine and contribute to the existing research? 3) how are empirical studies designed in terms of their methodologies? What considerations to investigators make in selecting participants, instruments/tasks, their methods of analysis?

Publishing is a rough process, but a reasonable goal once you have a strong understanding of what the norms are in your field. RE: writing to reiterate/further support existing findings...I'm not too sure. I think it depends; I feel like if you're further proving ideas that are fairly new/not quite established, it might work. However, if there's already a huge body of literature supporting said idea, then I don't think most journals would be interested in publishing that.


Upload monograph to preprint repository before acceptance for publication? Can one upload a book-length monograph to a preprint repository (e.g., ResearchGate) while awaiting for its acceptance for publication?

(Book preprints do exist on arXiv.org, e.g.: Bacciagaluppi & Valentini's Quantum Theory at the Crossroads: 0609184v2.)

You have to check with the publisher, or read their posted terms and conditions.  For some publishers it might be fine.  For others, they might insist on having the exclusive rights to distribute the work, and if you've already uploaded it to a preprint repository, that would make it impossible for the publisher to be the exclusive distributor.  In that case they might refuse to publish your manuscript.


Can I opt for traditional manuscript submission instead of open access in a journal that offers open access? I am a Ph.D. student and I wrote my first paper. The term open access is a new concept for me. I already watched YouTube videos about the subject, so I now understand that you have to pay a fee to the journal to get your paper published.
The question is: can I just go for traditional publishing or am I obliged to pay for open access if the journal offers it (example journal)?

Most journals labeled "open-access" are "open-access only". You don't have any other option for these. Because they are open-access, the journal can't make money in more traditional ways like selling access to university libraries - who would pay to access content that's already open? (I'm aware I'm simplifying a bit here) Be wary that predatory journals also fit in this category, so while there is nothing wrong in principle with open access you do want to make sure you're only paying for publication in legitimate journals.
Other journals use a more traditional model, but also offer an open-access option, often in part to comply with funding agency requirements that require authors to publish with some level of open-access. These journals will give you a choice when you submit, but make sure you are complying with the requirements of any funding you've received. Also note that many journals (including reputable ones) require some page charges for authors whether they are open-access or not; open-access costs more, but non-open-access isn't necessarily free.
If you want to publish under a different model than a journal offers, you need to find a different journal.
Two other things to think about: 1) PhD students shouldn't ever be paying out of their own pocket to publish; funds that pay for students to do research are often also available to pay publishing costs. Talk to your advisor. 2) Some journals have some sort of discount for financial hardship, which you should be aware of in case you can qualify.


What are financial prospects for a postdoc as compared to a PhD student without funding? I am going to start my PhD, unfortunately, I did not get any funding. I am thinking of taking a loan so that I could focus more on my PhD studies, but the loan will need to be repaid after PhD. Therefore my question is if my financial situation is likely to be better as a postdoc than as a PhD student. My reasoning:

As a PhD student:
I have to pay academic fees,
I do not get funding or a salary.

As a postdoc:
I do not have to pay academic fees or any other fees to a university (am I right?),
I may get a salary but may not to.

How many postdocs do get paid? I looked at research groups I am interested in and they say, they do not have funding for postdocs and their postdocs usually are supported by some grant that they themselves have arranged before coming to the group. So is my financial situation going to depend on if I can secure a grant for my research as a postdoc or I should expect to receive a salary? How likely is the success in either ways?

So is my financial situation going to depend on if I can secure a
  grant for my research as a postdoc or I should expect to receive a
  salary?

The question is not getting a grant or getting paid, it is getting paid by the institution you work for or getting your salary from a grant giving institution.

  How many postdocs do get paid?

(As far as I know) All of them. Depending on the country you are talking about it may even be illegal to employ someone without pay.
However, (as @virmaior pointed out) there are some "postdocs" in Japan that are not paid and have no work requirements. At least in Europe and the US this is not common and in most cases this is probably a bad idea for someone looking for a regular postdoc position (see my comment below).

  How likely is the success in either ways?

That depends on your field, the quality of your work, ... . We can not answer that but you can talk to your peers /supervisor about the job market to get an idea.

  [as a postdoc] I do not have to pay academic fees or any other fees to
  a university

Right.

One general remark: If you are not not getting a (paid) postdoc position or a grant you should try to find a job in the industry anyway. Finding a more senior position is usually much harder than finding a postdoc position.


What's the difference between "academic staff" and "research staff"? For example in Cambridge website of math department, it lists University Academic Staff and Research Staff. What is the difference?

In the UK academic staff and research staff are typically used to circumvent funding regulations that limit many fellowships to individuals who do not have, nor have ever had, a permanent academic staff position. The fundamental distinction is that academic staff are on permanent contracts and research staff are on fixed-term contracts. Academic staff generally are on teaching and research contracts, but some can be on teaching only or research only contracts. I have never meet a member of research staff that wasn't on a research only contract.

Things get hazy because often research staff have two contracts. A fixed term research only contract and a permanent research and teaching contract dated the day the research only contract ends. If they then get a different fellowship, they tear up the research and teaching contract and get a new one with the new date. This allows them to continue to be research only and qualify for fellowships.

While there are obviously differences across institutions, looking at the provided pages for Cambridge, every member of academic staff I looked at had a academic rank (e.g., lecturer or professor) and non of the research staff did.

The tenure track is not really a thing in the UK anymore. Permanent contracts usually come with a 3 year probationary period. The requirements to pass the probationary period could be as little as do not screw up, but could also have publication and funding requirements. I am not particularly familiar with the publication requirements, but they are likely focused on the REF framework. Departments generally have a group For non-academic staff on fixed term contracts that have most of the same privileges as academic staff. Often this is the Research Staff group, but sometimes RAs and post docs get dumped into the research staff label. As I said above, these select non-academic staff people on fixed term contracts often have a permanent contract waiting for them if there is a lapse in their funding so for all intensive purposes they have tenure.


Average time alloted for manuscript review across disciplines I am asking this question because I've always had the impression that manuscripts submitted to a journal in my field (theoretical linguistics) take an insanely long time to get published, and sometimes I get the impression that this is because, most of the time, nobody other than the author cares about getting things done within a reasonable amount of time. Some examples from personal experience follow.

For the last paper I submitted before getting my PhD, I had to wait nine months from the submission date to get reviews back from the referees.
Last week I got a review request from a journal I had never reviewed for previously. The review deadline is March 15 (almost four months).
In early October, I submitted a manuscript to a journal that I know asks reviewers to return reviews within 6 weeks. I checked the status of the manuscript online and it still says "with editor".
Earlier this year, I was about to start writing a review when my wife went into labor. By the time we came back from the hospital, I had forgotten about the review, so I missed the deadline. The editor didn't contact me to ask about the review until two months after the deadline.
Late in 2013, I was asked to write a survey chapter for a handbook. The expected publication date of the handbook is summer 2016.

All of this is not me being unlucky with editors and referees. In private conversations through the years, many colleagues have confirmed that it is virtually unheard of to get reviews back within 3 months of submission; 5 or 6 months seems to be a good average, but in some cases it can take longer (see my first point above). In general, everybody seems to have accepted that the submission-to-printed-journal process is going to take a bare minimum of one year, and that's assuming that the manuscript is accepted without revisions. If revisions are required, two years is not out of the question. Also, it's not like our papers are ridiculously long. I've reviewed about 100 papers so far, and the longest one was about 50 single-space pages; 30-35 single-spaced pages is closer to average.

I remember that, when I was a postdoc, my astrophysics housemate mentioned that in his field the entire submission-to-printed-journal process took only three or four months. I really can't see a good reason why theoretical linguistics shouldn't operate on similar timeframes, other than the fact that everybody seems to have grown used to things taking way longer than they really need to. What are the wait times in other fields? How do you manage to get things done quickly?

For mathematics, here's the latest survey done by American Mathematical Society:

http://www.ams.org/notices/201410/rnoti-p1268.pdf

You can find median times from submission/acceptance to acceptance/print/electronic print for various math journals as well as other statistics like the current estimate of waiting time for each journal. Not surprisingly, the median time from submission to acceptance in 2013 varies greatly; some take only a few months and others nearly a year and a half.

They do this survey every year. For instance, here's the one published 2 years ago:

http://www.ams.org/notices/201210/rtx121001473p.pdf

The worst offender that took the longest between submission and acceptance that year was Annals of Mathematics (which happens to be among the most prestigious math journals), and the median was 24 months.

I don't know if there is data for other fields. But American Physical Society occasionally makes statistics for their journals available, e.g., pages 14-17 of this PDF slides:

http://www.phys.nthu.edu.tw/~colloquium/2009F/T2.pdf

From my own experience as an author and reviewer as well as from what I hear, it appears that math journals typically take longer than physics journals. But probably things are drastically different across subfields even within one discipline (e.g., theoretical vs. experimental).

In any case, as the fact that they publish statistics indicates, both disciplines seem to take turnaround time very seriously. But for some reason, it appears that review tends to take more time if a journal publishes more mathematical papers. This seems to hold true for electrical engineering, too; the journal I have published in most frequently belongs to electrical engineering but is known for being heavily mathematical, and, lo and be hold, it's notorious for its slow, slow, slooow review...


non academic job opportunities for mid aged PhD I am currently a masters student that is due to finish early next year. I have a scholarship which covers costs and pays me a modest wage up until and including PhD. I would like to do my PhD but I am concerned about the job opportunities that will be available to me after graduating due to my age and skill set. I would be in my mid 30's when graduating and would like to work in a non academic, non laboratory environment after graduating. At some time later in life I would like to return to academia but at least after graduating I would prefer to not do so.
How are somewhat older PhD's perceived by employers outside of academia ? Do they have a harder time being employed ? I have read PhD's are often considered over qualified or to focused in their knowledge making them not as desirable to employers, is this still the case ?

Age here matters much less than the perceived seniority a PhD will grant you.

I graduated at the age you plan to, and have had a straightforward time finding employment opportunities. Certainly, at all ages, having a PhD limits some entry level opportunities, as you are seen as better fitting 'senior' tracks. For these, you may not have sufficient 'real world' experience. If you have interest in rapidly transitioning from individual contributor role to management, this may not be a bad thing at all. The key, for me, has been being open with employers and flexible about role.

Notably, this may somewhat depend on the culture in your field.


Is it appropriate to apply again for an internship you've previously turned down? I am in the process of applying to summer PhD research internships in industry (I'm in CS). Last year I had two appealing offers, but of course could only take one. This year I am still interested at working at the company whose offer I declined last year. However, I am unsure if it's considered inappropriate to reach out to the lab director again to inquire (this is how I approached it last year). It's not as though I burnt any bridges previously, it just feels strange, kind of like saying "Hey, I didn't want to work with you before, but what about now?"

Is this appropriate? It is research and I am in a research program, so I don't want to ruin potential future collaborations, and I hope I have not already done so by declining a previous offer.

And more generally, if inappropriate, when making a decision between multiple offers, should it factor into your choice that you may declining for this, and all future, internship opportunities?

I've been in this situation twice so far in just the last few years, and having to turn someone down who gave you an offer seems...well, downright unpleasant and awkward, doesn't it? I think this is because most of us do not like to receive rejection, and so we feel that saying no is itself unpleasant, and thus we can make the quick assumption that surely the person we said no to will dislike us or bear us ill-will, right?

Here's the funny thing: human behavior almost never actually works this way! It has taken me a long time for me to personally accept that people don't think the way I imagined they did, so I assure you this unpleasantness is completely natural - and something you'll need to get past right away, or it is going to hold you back.

It turns out that most decent people, when offering a job/position/opportunity, genuinely want you to take the best offer, even if they might be a bit disappointed that they couldn't offer you the most compelling option. Most people in positions to offer other people such opportunities have had to tell other people no themselves, and in fact regularly tell people no all the time now. They don't bear anyone ill will for this, and they themselves remember having multiple offers and having to take the subjectively best option at the time.

As a personal anecdote, the first time I recall experiencing this was for a summer internship at a company. I'd received a much higher offer to work somewhere else (nearly double), and I called the first company back and explained that I was very interested in their company, but received a very compelling offer and wondered if they had room to negotiate a bit. They checked, explained they could not for interns, but welcomed me to reapply once I graduate and they promised they'd be able to make a much more compelling offer. I thought they were being polite and would never seriously consider me again, but their corporate recruiter contacted me multiple times over the next few years to see if I might be interested in working with them. I had it happen again in a research position, where again the people I turned down seemed keen on trying to recruit me again!

It turns out that not only do reasonably people understand if you take a more compelling offer (especially if they consider the other offer impressive!), but the fact that you had the other offer - and how politely and sincerely you handled turning them down last time - reflects very well on you, and sometimes you'll find they end up liking you and wanting to recruit you even more! Not all the time, surely - but I've had it happen more times than I had the reverse occur. People who have a lot of options are desirable for lots of reasons, and the funny thing about being desirable is that a genuine expression of interest from you in them and their program is a far more valuable compliment than from someone who is deemed "less in-demand". They know you can afford to be picky, and that's often a desirable trait in any recruiting effort.

So by all means, it is absolutely appropriate to reapply - go for it! Be sincere, and if you feel like it you can even express how you hated to be unable to accept their offer last time, and would very much like to work with them. One caveat, though - this will only work so many times. If you decline them again and again, that's going to get old for just about anyone, so I'd suggest you be reasonably sure you actually want to work for them, or otherwise you're just stringing them along.


Is it possible to get an assistant professor position that does not require doing research? I know the Lecturer position is a purely teaching role (and can even be obtained with just a Master's degree). However, is the Assistant Professor role necessarily tied with research (or can it also be exclusively teaching as well)?

The reason I ask is because I have just finished a Master's degree and want to teach at the university or community college level. I believe obtaining a PhD will open up more doors at various universities and community colleges, and was wondering if that would enable me to land higher up academic positions that are exclusively teaching roles.

Any insight is highly appreciated!

The US, at least, is chock full of smaller colleges and a few universities that are devoted almost entirely to teaching. The phrase you are looking for is "teaching college" (or occasionally "teaching university"). The expectations for "scholarly activity" from the faculty at these institutions are much lower than at major research universities.

The downsides include:

Generally a higher teaching load. Count on at least twelve credit-hours per term.
A lack of money, space, time, equipment and assistance if you do want to do a little research.
No graduate students---these places generally only offer bachelor's degrees---and perhaps a less prepared or motivated undergraduate population from which to draw perspective research students.
Generally lower pay. Sometimes quite a bit lower.

Departments are sometimes smaller in size which means a good opportunity to develop a relationship with the major students and to mentor more than a few of them. To the degree that incoming students are less prepared but just as able you'll have a chance to really help them grow.

There have been some comments about the preparation of the student body: my "perhaps" above is a bit of a weasel word. Teaching colleges span a wide range of prestige and competitiveness, and their intake varies accordingly.

Some that are highly competitive and prestigious and are able to select a very able student body.  I'll offer the opinion that the expectations at the most competitive teaching schools looks more like those of research universities than like those of a generic "teaching college", though you should pay close attention to these questions on a case by case basis. The breadths of expectations described by the people I met at a recent teaching workshop was staggering.

The incoming student body at my school are an interesting bunch. The range of preparation and ability is very broad, and we do have some students with real potential but in most cases there is a reason they didn't get into a more competitive school nearby.

Some breezed through secondary school never learning how to work at their schooling. Many are non-traditional students with heavy family commitments. Some have never been in an environment where learning was valued and have never found out what they are capable of in that realm. A few are determined slackers. Some are just not academically gifted and won't be going on to further schooling after they get the credential they are here for.

As I indicated above, I'm finding this a very rewarding environment but choices in students with the ability and motivation to engage in research are limited and the institutional support is limited.


How do professors find consulting projects? How do professors find consulting projects to be a part of?

I think there are endless possibilities and no definitive answer. So just to name a few:

A company rep sees a talk of the professor´s group and sees that they are a good fit.
A company rep reads an article of the professor´s group and sees that they are a good fit. (Which not only includes articles in academic journals.)
They know each other from former joint projects (like publicly funded ones with industry partners, ...).
A former student/colleague works for the company and knows the professor is a good fit.
They search online for professors/institues that fit their needs.
The professor worked for them before going into academia.
They get refered to him by other companies/institutes/individuals.
...


What can I do when a manuscript is Completed Reject after 5 months of the submission I submitted a manuscript five months ago, today I received a rejection letter, completed reject. There are many comments from the reviewers and one sentence the reviewer said:

"It is a good idea to explore further the relationship between
interactivity and map interpretation in the context of thematic
mapping. The authors are right to say that these are commonly used
representations and that we need to know more about how, when, and why
they work. However,the article as presented has major issues in terms
of its formation, execution, and interpretation that I do not believe
can be resolved in a major revision".

I would like to know:

is there any possibility I could send it to another journal, when I
solve all the issues they have sent?
does completed reject mean I cannot send it to that same journal again?

You can certainly submit to another journal. You don't even need to make any changes to address the reviewers' comments, though it would certainly be advisable (otherwise you're likely to get similar reviews again).
Whether or not you can re-submit a revised paper to the same journal will depend on the journal's policy. The journals I know tend to treat outright rejection (as opposed to 'revise & resubmit') to mean no resubmission will be accepted, but this may not be universal. Of course, there is a grey area: at what point does something become a new paper rather than a revised version of an old paper?


Quitting physics master's degree for another physics MSc. degree due to family/financial-health reasons I'm now enrolled in the first semester of my first year in Germany (ranked in the best 100 universities) and I haven't taken any exams yet, since there's still at least 2-3 weeks for it. I never had any problem with the assignments on the courses, on the contrary, I always get the highest marks.
I have a decent CV with teaching experiences, grants, internships and 2 years of research in my bachelor and bunch of other stuff too but now I have to choose another master's degree program because my mother recently got diagnosed with last stage cancer and I can not finance my education considering the living expenses in Germany and relatively low (but high) tuition fees of the university.
I've already applied for the universities (for physics msc) that offers full scholarships (no tuition fees+scholarship). I was just wondering how bad it would look to quit one msc program for another program in the same field? (taking into consideration that I have a very solid reason)

Moving between different BSc/MSc programs, at least within Europe, shouldn't be seen as a problem: After all, one key point of the whole Bologna process (ECTS points etc.) was to make it easier to switch between different places in the course of your studies.  (Whether this worked is a different question, but at least, that's the philosophy behind.) So in fact, when you change programs you should not have to start all over again, but be able to (at least partly) use the credits you earned.  (This might speak in favor of trying to take the exams in the next weeks, or possibly postpone them due to the arguments given, rather than just dropping the courses altogether - given that many exams are online these days, this might be feasible.)


Is it okay to reference something well agreed by only one source, [e.g. 1 source]? I am wondering if it is okay write something like:

"Many scholars hold the view that this is like that" and then give one example reference (e.g. Gans et.al. 1965) ?

The reason I am wondering because it is generally accepted and no one seems to disagree on that. Is it better (1) not to reference at all, (2) reference the most original paper and skip e.g., or (3) mention few?

If something is considered common knowledge in the field (for instance, Newton’s second law in a physics paper), then no reference is required. If it’s been developed multiple independent times, though, I’d use more than one reference to establish it.


Would it be unethical to take a full time job and quit 8 months later if I get accepted for a PhD program? I am applying this winter for graduate school and I will finish undergrad this winter as well. Would it be unethical to take a full-time position with the intention to quit soon until I know whether I got accepted for graduate school or not?

I am considering this because if I didn't get accepted, I wouldn't have a gap until I start working, and the company would be a good brand which would certainly not harm my PhD application (but this shouldn't be a discussion on what prepares me good for graduate school). My plan is going back to industry after a PhD, so considering my reputation in the field or possible research jobs lateron in the same company, how could I reason my leave for getting a PhD? Or would you better decline the offer and wait for the admissions result?

It wouldn't be unethical for your boss to fire you 8 months after you take the job, if he wanted to. Labor is an exchange you and your employer enter into voluntarily. So, you shouldn't feel bad quitting after 8 months if you want to. It's not an ethical problem at all. It is more plausible to think there might be a personal problem if this is a small industry that you would plan to re-enter after finishing the degree. Don't tell your boss up front that you might quit in 8 months, that isn't any of his business. If you do accept an offer to do a phd somewhere, then you should tell him promptly, just as a matter of courtesy. This is to allow the company adequate time to find a replacement.


Where can I donate print academic journals? Like many people, I have a lot of print journals that I got over time with association memberships. However, I never use them, given online access at my institution. Does anyone know where I can donate them? I've looked at a lot of university libraries and often, it doesn't look like they accept them, as a policy. Most of the online guidance that I have found is fairly old, at this point.

Most US institutions have subscriptions to the most important journals that include online access of past content -- so they will generally not have any interest in stocking yet more paper in their archives.

This is different for developing countries where space is less expensive than journal subscriptions. I've had colleagues will connections to third world universities to which they always took boxed of books donated by colleagues every time they went. I suspect that if you ask around enough, you'll find colleagues who know someone in Africa or Southeast Asia who would be interested in taking books and journals -- but you may have to pay for shipping.


Is it possible to do research in cell/molecular biology without doing experimental work myself? I am currently a master’s student hoping to shift into a PhD. The thing is, I hate the lab work. I love all the literature review, designing experiments, troubleshooting problems and data interpretation.

Is there some sort of work around or is this just part of paying my dues?

The most likely answer that comes to mind is: “suck it up and pay your dues”, which I totally get, but is there an area somewhere that negates the benchwork, or is that just years of climbing until I get to be a PI (well, if I get to be a PI).

I don't think it is possible or constructive to avoid lab work in your field at PhD level.

The point of a PhD is to train you as an independent researcher, and therefore you need to be familiar with all stages of the research process, including data collection. There are plenty of fields for which data collection does not involve lab work, but unfortunately for you, cell and molecular biology are not among them.

Going through the process of lab work is not just important in terms of getting the data, it informs the rest of your work. I don't believe you will design an experiment as effectively if you are not familiar with exactly how long the different processes will take, where the challenges lie, where errors might creep in, and so on. Likewise, you are better able to interpret the data if you understand how it was collected. This stuff can be learnt to some extent by reading/talking to people/being given a demo, but by far the best way is to do it yourself.

"Paying your dues" may be a part of it - certainly, someone needs to do the legwork! - but I would encourage you not to look at it that way. At this stage in your career, it is highly valuable to you to gain an overview of the research process, even if later on (and you might not have to wait until you are a PI) you specialise in a particular phase of research.

EDIT: Others have pointed out fields, such as bioinformatics, in which it is possible to avoid lab work. Perhaps I was considering "cell and molecular biology" too narrowly. Nonetheless, bioinformatics still ultimately relies on data, and so I still believe that gaining experience of how that data is gathered is highly valuable.


How should I decline an offer from grad school I know such type of questions has been asked lots of times, but I do believe people's conditions vary and there is not necessarily someone who has an identical condition to mine, so please allow me to ask such question again with some details.

I was applying for master's degree in computer science, and got accepted by the one that I've accepted and the other one that I have to turn down now. It was the professor who contacted me first, and one month after I received my offer, I went to the city and visited the school and met professor in person. We talked about a number of things including the research, her supervision style and such. However, I don't think I ever speak like I will for sure go to that university, as I pretty much kept myself conservative. Now I've made up my mind to attend the first school already, so I want to know:

Should I send an email to the professor, besides one to the admission office, that I am about the decline the offer?
If yes, what content should be included in the email? How long should that be? Should I explain carefully my reasoning of picking school?

I well understand that it needs to be extremely polite, but other than that, I am not very sure what to mention.

Also, it would be nice if you can share some experience you have in general when you turn down your offers.

If it helps, I applied to schools in Canada, but I also welcome experiences in the US.

I am a professor and have experienced this situation from that point of view. Any experienced professor should be used to that, I would not worry too much about this.

I would suggest writing a brief mail to the professor to just inform her that you have accepted another offer. She might be interested to know what offer you accepted, so consider informing her about that, but you should not need to defend your decision.


Is it unethical to use not your real name when asking for questionnaire survey? I'm going to conduct an email-based questionnaire survey, but I would like to avoid sharing my real name/affiliation. In part, I'm curious if sender's name is actually going to affect response rate and include this aspect as a part of my study. Can it be considered unethical not to use my real name?

This is going to depend on your IRB/ethics review. Not revealing your name is probably ok. Hiding your affiliation is going to be harder since the IRB will want to guarantee the participants can contact someone if there is a problem. That said, if it is relevant to the research, the IRB can probably work with you to figure out something that works.


Relative or Absolute evaluation for academic positions? When a committee is evaluating applicants for a permanent academic position (such as a Lecturer or Assistant Prof. position), do they select the best candidate in the absolute, or do they relativize with the corresponding experience?

Consider for instance two applicants, one who just graduated from her PhD, and the other with 10 years of postdoc experience (for the sake of the example, let's assume that both are "regular" applicants, i.e., none of them is a exceptionally good or bad). Clearly, in general, the second applicant will have many more publications, grants, etc, than the first one.
In that case, will the committee judge them by relativizing the CV of the second one by stating like only the number of publications per year counts, not the total one, or say that the second one has a better CV in the absolute, and therefore is better?

I don't think there's a single answer to this question. Ultimately, departments look for the candidate who will be the best fit for a given position, and for the department as a whole. If you also subscribe to the view that the department would rather choose a candidate who is more likely to accept a given position, then that also changes the decision calculus.

For the most part, however, I don't think hiring committees are doing "hard" comparisons of citations; that would just be foolish. Grant-winning experience also does matter, obviously, but that's also something that can be learned and developed over time.

So, ultimately, hiring tends to be a subjective process—you can view the data in whatever "objective" light helps you get to the conclusion you want.


Will it hurt my masters application if SOP focuses on my research interests, but the program has only a few courses on that subject? I want to pursue a master's in Computer Networks with an interest to learn Software Defined Networking. For some of the universities that I have applied, I have summarized like 'I would love to go deep into networking particularly software defined networking' Now will this be a negative if the colleges have only few courses on the subject?

Talking about your specific research interests in a SOP is great. If the specific interests are a good match for the program, they'll love it. If they are a poor match, you probably wouldn't have been happy or gotten the training you wanted in that program.

More importantly: Take a deep breath. (1) Your SOP for a masters program is not going to be scrutinized as closely as you seem to imagine. You are overthinking things. (2) It's too late to do anything.

Good luck!


I determined a parameter for an experiment – shall I ask for authorship? I am working in an experimental-physics group. They are going to publish a paper soon. So far, I see five authors on first draft (PhD student, postdoc, collaborator, collaborator, PI).

I am not sure whether I should ask my PI to consider putting my name on the paper or not. I was working on the project for only a month and then the PI gave me another project right after I finished it. I was not involved in any analysis of the paper, but I was working on finding a good parameter for the experiment.

Initially, when I was working on the project, I thought I would be one the authors, however, one year and half later, the first and second author of this project did too much work, so it seems like that I did nothing on this experiment compared to them.

Is it worth it to ask my PI to consider me in the paper?

Whether or not you should be an author on the paper is not about whether you did something, but whether you contributed intellectually. For example, a lab technician who washed the petri dishes and while everyone was working on the experiment in the background turned the dial of the radio to the station that everyone wanted to listened to (i.e., determined one parameter that was crucial to the experiment), did contribute to the experiment. But it was not an intellectual contribution, and so authorship is probably not warranted.

Without more details in your question, it is hard to tell whether you should or should not be an author on the paper. But, this is worth a conversation with your adviser. It's likely going to be a slightly awkward conversation, but it is one in which you can talk about the norms in your field, what qualifies as an "intellectual contribution" and why or why not everyone on the paper should or should not be an author.