PhD student as corresponding author: author list and logistics I'm a PhD student in the physical sciences and am looking for input regarding an authorship situation. My advisor recommends I be the corresponding author on an upcoming paper because I came up with the entire project, oversaw everything, secured the funding for it, and so on. I mentored an undergraduate who did a good chunk of work and made essential contributions, although I wrote up the manuscript and still ended up doing quite a lot, if not most, of the analysis. How would you approach the author listing in this situation?

In my field, corresponding authors (denoted with *) are typically the final authors, such that this would be: Undergraduate, Advisor, Me*. However, I have a few reservations about this. This is perhaps superficial, but I am concerned that not being listed as the first author will make my direct contributions subconsciously weighed less when applying for awards or academic careers. This is especially important because this is the paper that I want to represent my PhD, in the sense that when I apply for future careers, this is the research trajectory I want to make my own. I'm not sure if being listed last would help or hurt this. Of course, another option is to have it be: Me*, Undergraduate, Advisor. I suppose that resolves the prior issues and is more what I'm leaning towards, but perhaps I am being biased somehow in my approach.

Regardless, there's the separate issue that as "corresponding author", my contact information will presumably not be permanent. In this sense, it seems silly for me to be the author to which correspondence should be addressed, even if I do know the most about the details of this work. Perhaps then it might make more sense to be joint corresponding authors with my advisor?

What would you do? Note: I will certainly be discussing this with my advisor and co-authors to get their input.

For context, the CRediT roles are as follows:

Me: Conceptualization, data curation, formal analysis, funding acquisition, investigation, methodology, project administration, resources, software, supervision, validation, visualization, writing - original draft, writing - review & editing

Undergraduate: formal analysis, investigation, software, validation, writing - review & editing

Advisor: supervision, writing - review & editing

The authorship order and corresponding author issues are separate, and I think considering them separately will make it much easier to address each of them. There is no need for the corresponding author to be in any particular position in the authorship order.

Yes, it can be common for the corresponding author to be last in fields with a "final author is senior author" convention, but that's by correlation, not causation: senior authors are both last and are often corresponding authors.

These days, I don't think the corresponding author role is important for much beyond submission and handling things with the editor. There are much better ways to find contact information for authors, such as their personal or institutional website. If you expect to still be at the same institution (or at a minimum still have access to your email) when the paper has gotten through the publishing process, I think it's not much of a problem for you to be the corresponding author.

In my field which has similar authorship conventions, "You*, Student, Advisor" seems appropriate to me.


Doing a PhD or starting an industrial career? I will finish my Master degree in electrical engineering (in Germany) soon, but at the moment I am quite unsure about my future after that. Quite some of my fellow students just joined the institutes of the university whose professors supervised their Master's Theses. There they will work as assistants of the professor and go for the PhD.
I have to do an industrial internship during the next months to finish my Master. After that, I would have the opportunity to join my institute as PhD candidate as well (I know that because one of my friends already told me that they are looking for staff at the moment).
Now I am stuck with the decision whether to go for a PhD or to start working in the industry. Usually I really enjoy research and solving problems while exploring some new topics, like I did in my Master's Thesis. But when I think back to the time of my thesis, there were several problems and "wrong" results (that partly contradicted theory, like wrong simulations) that caused a lot of frustration. Back then, it took half a year to write my thesis, but a German PhD in engineering will take 5-6 years. To be honest, I was really relieved when this half year of writing the Master's Thesis was over and I achieved to submit a really good thesis.
Another thing that discourages me is the way that scientists seem to work these days: The university/faculty/professor wants you to publish at least one paper during a certain period of time. But that contradicts my vision of science: You should publish papers if you discovered something new or at least relevant in a field of study, not because some schedule tells you to.
My supervisor at work (who has a PhD) told me that you should never go for a PhD just for having the title or having better career options. He said that you should truly enjoy research because those 5 or 6 years will be a very tough and often frustrating time. If you lack the passion of research you should not go for it.
I am quite clueless at the moment. My basic goal in life is to be happy in general, not necessarily obtaining the highest educational degree. I really do not know if I have the frustration tolerance to find joy in these 5-6 years of doing a PhD.

Long story short:
Which advice would you give any Master graduate who is facing the choice of whether he should start an industrial career or go for a PhD? Can you provide some experiences of your time as PhD candidate? Which questions would you see as most important to be answered to make this decision?

Best regards!

Doing a PhD is a wonderful experience. It requires from you to become monomaniacal and obsessive with a very narrow topic in your discipline. There are many highs and many lows while you work on your doctorate. But the motivation should be your very own desire to learn and deeply engage in our discipline. Doing a doctorate for any other reason (e.g. professional opportunity,social status), will not keep you motivated enough -- let alone guarantee professional attainment. If your Master's thesis or your understanding of how academia works ("publish or perish") did not invigorate you to go for a doctorate, I would discourage you from spending your time and effort in pursuing it. Whatever you decide, good luck!


Protocol emailing R Package creators I have found an R Package written up that does exactly what is required but cannot figure out a bug that has presented itself. I have gone through the code and source code for the function and cannot figure out the problem. The authors' emails were included in the documentation. Is it inappropriate to email the creators to ask if the bug has occurred before or if I have any faults in my arguments?

Assuming that the documentation does not explicitly tell you not to email the maintainers about bugs, and assuming that there's not a forum, bug-tracker, etc. for the package, then I think it would be perfectly reasonable to contact one of them via the email address they provide in the documentation.

If they provide no other means of reporting bugs in the package, then I don't think they'd have any justification for taking offence at being contacted at an address they provide alongside the package.


IETF RFC: Ask question to the author Is it common for a graduate student to ask a question directly the author of an IETF RFC?

I have a subtle doubt about an aspect of a protocol addressed by a certain RFC and I have already searched online and posted question on stack exchange but I haven't found an answer yet.

Should I contact the author directly to the address shown in the RFC?

Thank you.

An IETF RFC may often be thought of as a certain peculiar form of scientific publication: they are frequently cited as such, feed research programs, and can indeed significantly count toward the evaluation of one's research career.  Certainly that has been the way of it for people who I have known who have authored RFCs or otherwise participated in the IETF.

As such, contacting the author of an IETF RFC is not particularly different than contacting the author of a scientific paper: make sure you do your homework first (as it sounds like you've done), so that you don't embarrass yourself or waste the authors' time, and then feel free to contact them.  Their contact information is there for a reason.


What steps would an amateur scientist have to take in order to get a scientific breakthrough published? I would like to know from an academic standpoint on what steps that an amateur scientist would have to take in order to get his/her scientific breakthrough published in a major academic journal/scientific magazine.

Say that this person is outside of academia, he/she has no college degrees, and he/she has stumbled upon a scientific breakthrough by chance after years of doing self-study, research, and experiments with a particular scientific area of study.  Also, say that this person has a job with a modest salary so if they will need to raise a lot of money to get it published, they will have to get it from an angel investor or from crowdfunding.

Although I understand that the odds of such a person coming up with a scientific breakthrough is very slim to none, I still would like to know the process that this person will likely have to follow if he/she wants to get it published.

For example, would the first step be that this person should take be making an appointment with a college professor in order to get a professional opinion on their scientific breakthrough?  If so, what guarantee does the amateur scientist have that this college professor will not try to steal this scientific breakthrough?  Should the amateur scientist insist that the college professor first sign a Non-Disclosure Agreement?

Would the second step be that the amateur scientist meet with another college professor to in order get a second opinion and again have that professor sign a NDA?  What would be the 3rd step, 4th step, etc., etc.

Although there are probably many steps in the process of getting it published, I'm interested in just the major steps that will likely have to be taken.

The title question is answered by "write a paper and submit it to a journal". The amateur scientist doesn't need anything special to do that.

The questions in the text deal with a separate question, which is whether or not the breakthrough actually is a breakthrough. In this case getting a professional opinion is certainly going to be helpful (see Kaveh's answer to a related question for the process). It's easy to deal with the "threat" of the professor stealing the idea: just establish precedence by, e.g, attaching the manuscript to an email with a timestamp. If the professor tries to steal the idea anyway, he would be breaking some deep-rooted academic norms. If it's proven that he's plagiarizing, he can get into serious trouble.


Is open-plan office for academia at all? Where I did my PhD, typically two PhD students shared an office room. In constrast, where I am working as a postdoc now, about 50 PhDs and postdocs share an open-plan office.

I find it difficult to concentrate in the latter kind of arrangement because of the noise. Some people use head/earphones, but I guess not everyone likes to listen to music while working. I am wondering if this is a common arrangement in academia. My guess is that while it might work elsewhere, the nature of academic research precludes an open-plan type of office.

In any case, is it appropriate to ask my supervisor for a room or a smaller/quieter space to work in? I don't think I would ask, though, because everybody else seems to be fairly content, but I'm just wondering.

There is plenty of research showing that open-plan offices are a very bad idea, not just in academia but everywhere (see below for some examples).

Unfortunately, they are also much cheaper than proper offices (mainly because you can pack people much more densely).

Danielsson et al. (2014): "Office design's impact on sick leave rates", Ergonomics 57(2), doi:10.1080/00140139.2013.871064:

  The cumulative evidence thus indicates that traditional open-plan offices are less good for employee health.

Oommen et al. (2008): "Should Health Service Managers Embrace Open Plan Work Environments?: A Review" Asia Pacific Journal of Health Management 3(2), 37-43:

  Research evidence shows that employees face a multitude of problems such as the loss of privacy, loss of identity, low work productivity, various health issues, overstimulation and low job satisfaction when working in an open plan work environment.


Is it acceptable to setup a survey online (but not send to human subjects) before getting IRB approval? I am doing a small survey-based research project, where I need to setup surveys online. I was wondering if I needed full IRB approval before I can setup the surveys online on Qualtrics/RedCap/Google forms? (I'll of course wait after approval before sharing the survey with any human subjects that would fill in the survey)

Addenum:
It's social science research, it's a few questions from a validated survey we will be using. I'm pretty sure the protocol will be accepted. There is a visiting student for the month here and to gain time I thought he could setup the questions on Qualtrics. Would this be acceptable?

Yes, this is quite standard. There is nothing special about setting up the survey in Qualtrics that requires IRB approval. Just be prepared to make any changes the IRB requires/recommends during the approval process.

Note that you should not SEND your survey to human subjects using Qualtircs. But taking it yourself or working through the bugs with an RA would be fine. Think about it this way - if this was a "paper survey" you would be allowed to type your survey before handing it into IRB. But you wouldn't be allowed to mail it to any subjects.


How to protect my research rights when my proposal was stolen by my chair? I am an assistant professor; submitted an internal grant proposal.  It had been rejected.  Meanwhile I realized that my Dept. chair submitted my proposal to an external grant (listed herself as PI and me as CO-PI); she has been recently awarded.

My chair was really brutal to protect herself in this matter: forced me to say that I asked her to do & she got a new IRB for the same proposal to put herself as PI. Definitely I needed to argue with her regarding her misbehavior.

Then today she informed that my appointment would not be renewed; so I am in the situation to leave right after developing the survey and collecting data (in the middle of the grant).

What should I do?  Is there any way I can protect my research rights?

Any advice will be truly appreciated!

If you have been informed that your contract isn't being renewed, then the question is how badly you want to burn any bridges. However, I suspect that your chair is going to be of no use to you in any event.

The first thing you need to do is collect all of your records related to the grant. Any email, correspondence, etc.—anything that shows you were the real originator of the grant, and that she basically stole the work. I would also include the correspondence showing that your contract will not be renewed, as well as the visit of your future replacement. All of this shows dishonest intent on the part of your chair. This evidence should then be sent simultaneously to:

the dean of your college;
whoever is responsible for research across the university;
the chief administrative officer of the university;
the agent in charge of the section at the agency who awarded the grant; and
the office at the grant agency responsible for investigations into the grant.

The way you have been treated is reprehensible and the chair under no circumstances should be allowed to "skate free."

It also goes without saying that you should not do any further work related to this grant. You should also find a good lawyer.


Is it fair for a professor to grade us on the possession of past papers? My English professor recently asked us to bring in all of our graded essays from the whole semester in order to fill out a 'rubric' of sorts which tallied the various types of mistakes we had made. She will be grading the rubric, and previously stated that if we did not have all the essays from the past semester in class that day, our grade would be comparably lower than otherwise. She made no mention of 'keeping all graded work' at any point during the course, and in my current institution, I have never been expected to keep past work for any specified duration. There are a multitude of reasons why a student may not have been able to keep particular (or any) essays, which my professor did not take into consideration.

Is it fair for my English professor to expect us to keep all of our past graded work, and then grade us on our possession? If unfair, how can I bring this issue up with her and dispute her expectation?

Note that I doubt that this is because she lost the essays; they’ve already been averaged into our final grades.

If this was not mentioned in the syllabus (or at least announced prior to the papers being returned), this is totally inappropriate.  While it may be foolish for students not to keep their graded work (at least until the end of the term), if it was not established as a requirement before the students got their papers back, it cannot reasonably be made a retroactive requirement.

You should bring this problem to the attention of the instructor.  You do not need to reveal whether you actually have all your past papers when you bring this up, lest the instructor try to wave your concerns away if you say that you actually do have all the papers and are just complaining as a matter of principle.  I would also suggest having multiple students come to her together to make the same objection; that may make it more likely that she will relent.  However, if the instructor does not agree to make a change, you should take this up with someone higher up.  That could mean the department chair (or another departmental official, such as the director of undergraduate or graduate studies) or a student ombudsman, if one is available.


Hypothesis for an Engineering Oriented Research Thesis Question: What to write in a hypothesis that can't claim statistical results of any kind -- only those of engineering nature.

Explanation:
In thesis writing, hypothesis is claimed to be one of the most important aspects. I'm not arguing with that but in some cases, it seems a little over-priced. I am currently writing a thesis that deals with enhancing an existing security model. I can't give out the exact idea obviously but please let me explain with the help of an example.

Let's say, I have a security problem that the existing "role-based access control" of MS-Windows does not solve some problems -- so, I come up with time-based constraints for the model used and incorporate them in a new "enhanced" model. In the thesis explaining this contribution, what do I write in the thesis? I can't claim an "N%" increase in security or any other statistic that I can think of.

So, what's the hypothesis in this case?

The hypothesis-model is good for research where you want to understand how something works, but I think it is ill-suited for capturing the full scope of engineering research. After all, in engineering, you're primary goal is not to learn something about how the world works, but rather to change how the world works! So, instead of a hypothesis on how something works, I'd put up existing gaps in the ability to do something as a working basis. That will then put a focus on your research result as an extension of technical capabilities. In order to evaluate your research results, you would then have to show that your results actually close the existing gap.

Of course, also engineering research needs to understand something about how existing things work in order to be able to create something new. Hypotheses are suitable in engineering to clarify these preliminary things. In your case, you state that "the existing 'role-based access control' of MS-Windows does not solve some problems" - that sounds like a perfect hypothesis to test for. But verifying this hypothesis is certainly not the key step in your research, and maybe it has already been done previously. That's why I'd recommend not to focus on a hypothesis as the basis for engineering research (though one might use them to clarify preliminaries), but focus on identified gaps in current technical abilities.


Is it ethical for schools to offer merit scholarships, when these are more difficult for students from some socioeconomic backgrounds to get? To illustrate - students with low income perform worse relative to their more privileged peers, and when a low income student is trying to get an education, she has to foot a far larger bill (she doesn't earn the merit scholarships).

If you just look at the amount of rich kids that get full rides because they're good at school, it undermines the merit argument. The current model seems to work again to the idea of social mobility, which we take for granted, by burdening poor people with more student debt.

Is this assessment correct and if so, is it a justifiable educational model?

Schools don't charge more to low performing students, they provide opportunities to attract and retain high performing students, through merit-based scholarships and grants. While it is probably true that low-SES individuals are less likely to qualify for such awards, it is not fair to surmise that schools are 'charging more' to low-SES individuals.  There are many 'rich' students paying the same tuition as their less-well-off peers.

The more pertinent question is whether there exist sufficient non-merit based scholarships for disadvantaged populations, and need-based financial aid, to give low-SES individuals opportunity (probably not).


How do you deal with the ridiculous catch 22 to get into grad school I have applied for a second round of 100% rejections and needless to say I am not feeling great about it. What I am especially angry/frustrated about is that neat little sentence every rejection letter has:

  We recommend getting more research experience and trying again next year

HOW?!

I have applied for R&D jobs in my field for a year and a half while working. I can't get an interview, when I contact the companies the reply is "you don't have a masters". Well that's convenient isn't it? Universities won't accredit me because of lack of experience and I can't get the experience because I don't have the credentials.

I'd abandon the goal all together but I am too stupid and stuborn to accept giving up an unreachable dream.

I have been a CS professor at both large and small schools, so let me say a bit about getting into the program from both perspectives.

When I was working at a small school, we didn't have a large graduate population, so we accepted anyone who was qualified - regardless of research experience, etc. Anybody who was well-qualified (eg good grades and reasonable application package) also received a TAships covering the full cost of their degree. I still managed to get some fantastic students through this process. (Who didn't have research experience or were not from a traditional CS background.)

I am currently at a larger school, and we get something like 5x more applications than we are able to accept. So, most students get rejected, even highly qualified ones.

Based on this comparison, I'd suggest that you may need to look at a smaller school. Try to find an opening to work on a problem that might help you with a grad school application in the future.

In particular:

Find smaller schools with professors doing work in the area that you are interested in. Smaller schools can have very strong professors for many reasons. (Look particularly for recent publication activity.)
Read all of their recent papers.
E-mail ask research questions about their work. These questions should be genuine and should reflect a strong understanding of the work. You could even, for instance, ask if a project would be a suitable extension of the published work. (eg your method X works under conditions Y and Z. Would method W broaden the applicability of the approach? Or, would method V improve the performance when condition U also holds?)
Implement and try some of these ideas in practice. (You could even do this before doing #3.)
Use this to improve your graduate application. There are several ways to do this. First, if you have good communication with a professor, they may directly be able to help you get admitted to the program. But, this can also be part of your statement of purpose (SOP). I've read lots of awful SOPs. Your application will stand out if you can talk about a research problem you are interested in, why it interests you, and why it is a fit with the department/professors.

There are lots of variations on this approach, but I've had students use parts of the approach on me, and it worked.


Is volunteer lab work a good practice? I met a  professor last year through an online search and expressed my interests to his research and his advanced lab technique, in which I lack of experience.

I also asked for a PhD opportunity from him, he says that he has no money or limited funding now, so I agreed to work for 3 months for free. Would be practical that this volunteer experience could lead to a PhD after this 3 months? On one side I am not happy with working for free, as I had employment for 1 year as a research assistant. On the other side, this potential professor appears nice to employees around and keeps his words, and has good tracks of papers.

But am I just wasting of time, what actions should I take to figure this out before too late?

Supplementary information: He said that he was on travel, so I was off for a while. He did not contact me till I found him. Is this normal or just my altitude should be changed? I feel not well, maybe he does not really want me as a fellow at all?

I am really frustrated, should I go further or not, is he just being polite to accept me to practice the techniques in his lab for 3 months? Am I wasting of time to even practice these test methods?

If you WANT to volunteer in the lab as a learning opportunity, it can be a great practice.

If you don't want to, decline the offer and either look elsewhere or come back when his budget can handle bringing someone else in... and hope that he hasn't already found someone who was pleased to work as a volunteer and delighted to be paid.

The world is what it is, not what we wish it should be.


How to connect with professors as a non-academic? Long story short, I could never attend higher education, and now, later in life, I would love to be with people 100x smarter than me that take a scientific approach to discussions. Professors seem like good candidates. My girlfriend recently finished her PhD(albeit in a different field than I'm interested in) and interacting with her professors and advisors felt like such a stimulating environment. I would absolutely love to find myself in such an environment.

My question is: I want to contact professors, perhaps attend lectures, and I'd REALLY like to eventually try and develop some sort of mentorship, but I'm completely outside academia. Is this absolutely impossible? Studying is a bit complicated, as my level of the local language is A2, and I need B2 to enrol in a bachelor's, so I'd only be able to attend lectures from Master's level and upwards, which are taught in English.

The topics are psychology/political science/philosophy/neuroscience.

Any tips?

You could try to select a precise topic, collect related scientific articles on Google Scholar from universities located in the country or city you live in, see if their authors have social media accounts (Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn), add, follow or connect (to) them, read the articles and start asking questions to the authors.


What is an Ad-Hoc Acting Editor for Journal of Finance and/or PNAS? What is an Ad-Hoc Acting Editor for the Journal of Finance and/or PNAS? Is it similar to the special-issue editor? How to select that editor in paper submission?

A special issue editor would normally be referred to as a guest editor.  Most likely the “normal” editor suddenly resigned or otherwise cannot continue her or his duties for a while, and someone stepped in until a permanent editor is found or the regular editor returns.


Some Advices Regarding to Preparation for Mathematics Graduate Programs I am a rising senior at college in US actively pursuing the mathematics and microbiology majors.  I am deeply interested in the arts of topology and set theory, and their applications to the machine learning and biological data analysis.  My plan is to apply for graduate programs in mathematics, but I did not decide pure or applied as I like both aspects of the mathematics.

Started out as a microbiology major, I did not begin to pursue mathematics until the end of sophomore year.  Started from my freshman year, I have been haunted by a severe case of OCD, which seriously interfered with my study and undergraduate research, and subsequently my grades and research performance were not good (my current GPA is below 3.00....).  When I first noticed the signs of OCD, I thought I can handle it with my mental strength, and the they will go away by their own (like a cold virus), which I realized are big mistakes!!  Starting on this Summer, however, I started to receive psychological counseling and medical treatment, which have been helping me a lot.

Although my grades are not good, I took some graduate-level courses in microbiology and advanced courses in mathematics and got A's.  On this semester, I am going to take the advanced classes in both math and microbo, including one graduate-level course in mathematics.  I also got several opportunities in the undergraduate research and mathematical reading courses with professors of my big interest.  Although OCD is still affecting me, I am in a much better position now as I started to regain a control of myself.

My question is that if it is too late to start preparing for graduate programs in mathematics.  If preparing for mathematician is late, then I would like to search other opportunities.  Another worry is that I fear the admission committee might look down on students with mental disorders as people who have weak mentality and cannot handle their problems properly, thus are not suitable to learn mathematics.  Could you provide me some advice about preparing for graduate programs in mathematics?

I am planning to stay one more year after my senior year, or possibly two years.

Disclaimer: I'm not in the field of mathematics, but I have been in a similar position

I think it is still possible for you to switch to math. It helps to get some more research experience if your GPA is not that great. A good reference and research experience will make up for a lower GPA in a lot of programs. I had some mental health issues during undergrad, and took an RA position for a year before applying. I cited health issues as a reason for my poor grades (< 3.0 GPA), and asked the professor I worked with during undergrad to mention this in his letter of recommendation. I don't think you have to explain your mental health issues in detail during the application process.


Why do students go for a PhD even when chances of getting academic jobs on its completion are slim? This is in reference to my question: How to do a PhD to equip myself for a job as assistant professor.

I was told in the answer of the above linked question that chances of landing a job as an assistant professor in Mathematics are quite slim. Very few people will actually get a permanent position in academia.

An article of 2014 shows only 0.5-3% of PhD graduates will actually get a job as an Assistant Professor.

But I have two questions:

  Why do so many people still apply for a PhD in some reputed institutes in India even knowing the harsh reality? I found there are 1500 applications for four PhD scholarship positions.

  One answer says that people move to industry, but I still don’t understand how after doing a PhD in suppose differential geometry or algebraic geometry one can do a job in industry if he/she gets no position as an assistant professor.
  Will one be satisfied to do some managerial work in some Consultancy firm after doing a PhD in Mathematics?

  Are people jobless after a PhD?
  Completion of a PhD requires so much effort. So why is there no value after doing it?

NOTE:

In the most up-voted answer below it has been said that many who enroll for  a PhD don't even wish to pursue an academic career.

I have been asking my seniors who are currently pursuing a PhD or are in the verge of completing their degree or who have completed it.
They said that they all want to be Professors in some Universities and want to be involved in research because that is the dream job for them.

I am obviously talking about PhD in Mathematics

The issue is that the frame of your question is wrong. You’re assuming that the purpose of a PhD is to get an academic job, when that is not the case: Many people who get PhD’s have no desire for an academic job, even from the time they apply!

The number of academic positions is indeed insufficient to absorb all the PhD’s. But there are lots of other “landing spots”:

Industrial research and development
Start-ups
Non-university government research institutes (like the US NIH or DOE lab system, or the Max-Planck-Instituts in Germany)
Finance and consulting
Administrative and Supervisory positions in other disciplines.

Overall, PhD’s have a lower unemployment rate than non-PhD’s. It’s all a question of where they want to go.

As for doing a PhD, the basic skill it teaches you—the one that makes you valuable to lots of people—is the ability to learn new fields quickly and become an expert in those fields. You don’t always need specialized knowledge in your PhD topic to get into an area.

But ultimately the reason for doing a PhD is the love of research and discovery. People pursue research careers because that’s what they want to do.


What should I do about a professor who got in my face and yelled at me? I'm a lab assistant at my university and one day some of my coworkers who are underclassmen asked me about my experience with a professor I had taken a couple classes with. I told them that every class that professor teaches is hard and that one specific class, is a "flipped" course in which students have teach themselves the material and come to class ready to just answer questions and do classwork. I also mentioned that in that particular class the professor would get frustrated when students asked her questions during class time (so much so that she would yell at whoever asked her a question and in one instance became so frustrated that she stabbed the white board with her expo marker and could no longer write with the marker because the tip was completely sunken in). I also mentioned that this particular class put me under so much stress that it caused me to develop anxiety. Everything that I told my coworkers was my honest experience with said professor.

It is not the first time I've told others at work about my experience while taking classes with this professor as well as with any of my other professors (in fact, on that same day I had talked about many of my previous professors and my time in their classrooms). Somehow one professor who manages some of the labs found out that I was talking about that particular professor (I'm not sure what exactly she heard or how much of what I said she heard) and decided to get right in my face and yell at me to stop talking about said professor because she didn't like what I said. After having yelled at me she just briskly walked away. When she confronted me, I was standing right next to my coworker and I noticed that even my coworker had to pull her head back because of how loud and close the professor got to me/us. My ears were also ringing for a few moments.

I am not upset at the fact that whatever I said got out because I don't think I made any personal attacks, I simply talked about my experience in that particular professor's class. What upsets me is that the way the professor confronted me has really increased my stress levels and anxiety to the point that my blood pressure has risen. I am also experiencing dizzy spells, fatigue, and aches all over my body. I suspect that this is due to my anxiety. I have been stressing over this incident for the past couple of days and I'm not sure what to do.

For now I've decided to go speak with a counselor to try and calm down and seek a different perspective on the situation. I'm also going to discuss the situation with one of my superiors at work and ask her for advice as well as get her perspective on the situation. I don't want to make any rash decisions or actions based on poor judgement and wild emotions. I am not comfortable enough to talk to the professor who confronted me (at least not 1-on-1). Can anyone give me any suggestions on what I should do? Do I contact the Dean? (Is there even enough basis to do this?)

It sounds like you were the victim of a (relatively moderate) kind of abusive workplace behavior.  I would not seek to handle this through the department-level chain of command but rather through the university level policies on such things.

You don't say where in the world you are, but at a US university there will be something quite formalized in place about this: e.g. see this policy at my university.  Note that the prohibited conduct includes

  harassment of any nature such as stalking, swearing or shouting.

The webpage goes on to explain that any employee who witnesses this kind of behavior should report it to human resources (HR).

You want to find the equivalent at your university.  When you report it, you should mention the name of your coworker, and they will very likely be contacted.  The rest of it is really up to HR, and they will know how to approach it confidentially and so forth.  They are also the experts on how serious the behavior is, but I think there is no question but that it is serious enough to report to them.

By the way, none of this sounds like it will be much fun for you, but I really encourage you to do it anyway.  I suspect that the likely outcome is that if this is an isolated incident, the professor in question will get nothing more than a talking-to.  But what if it isn't an isolated incident?  The community needs your help to identify and deal with the problem.


Pathways to get into PhD program I graduated in 2016 from one of the best-known private engineering universities in India with 3.97 GPA (just got my WES report). All i knew till Undergraduate is self-study and attend classes and score decent marks in Exams. I was guided in that way.

Unfortunately, No professor of mine encouraged to conduct any research or help publish the research that i have done on my own. Having no experience with research and no support, When I saw research papers i thought they were just more talented and I am not up to the mark.

I have done decent projects in my undergrad and have contributed my work to my company. All my research work has been going into my projects, but not papers. Because I have no experience. May be I am lazy or shy/afraid to ask help.

I am taking my next step in my career, I am currently applying to US universities for MS in CS for Fall'19.

Will Masters program help me get a kick-start for my research experience, leading to PhD program?

If so, should i know anything before going to college?

PS: your answer can change a life, Please answer if you feel you have something to say. Thanks.

I can only speak for germany and only my own experience as a researcher:
I don't know exactly what you mean by "kick-start leading to PhD program", but if you mean "will a masters help me get a PhD?" Then the answer is definitely yes. This should apply anywhere on the globe where bachelor/master is established. Where in general it is possible to do a PhD with "only" a bachelor degree, it is pretty rare and I personally know not a single case.

As for tips: If you want a PhD, do the masters program. Get in touch with people, professors and lecturers. In my group, a lot of people are hired after completing their master thesis here.

So the best tips I can give you are:

Enroll into topics which you are truly interested in
Make a good impression in exercises(talk to the lecturer after the session, don't slack off, get good grades...)
Get a position as research assistant in a working group
Do your master thesis in the group where you are most interested in(and here is the hard part: during this time you should work very hard, make good impressions, try to get good results... since you want to work there later)

Those tips are pretty much the route I took and I guess there are many more tips and life experiences out there to help you.


PhD dropping out and funding reimbursement What happens if one has a PhD scholarship and drops out in the second year of the PhD program? Should he pay back the money that he got in his first doctoral year?

This will depend on many things including local law and the details of anything signed. In the absence of some rule, it is unlikely that there is any need to repay. In particular, many funding agencies have no real way to accept money paid back. The reason that the person dropped out may be very complex, and actually a shared issue with the institution.

But this can differ widely. Read the fine print if any.


Workshop attire for women in India? I've been invited to an academic workshop in India. As a North American woman, it is conventional to wear business casual (e.g., pant suit or dress) or even casual clothing to a conference or workshop in my field (geography/health). Would it be appropriate to wear business casual in India or to dress more formally? Are pants preferred over knee-length skirts for women?

This is out of my field as I’m male, but think of the temperature, so next be respectful (not suggesting you wouldn’t...) but a lightweight business suit may be the order of the day.

Any images of last years conference available - may give you a hint...

I don’t think you will be required to wear a sari ... Mind you a colleague went to a conference abroad and made some friends and they went shopping to get her some national dress as a memento .... and some light fun of course.


How to ask for a reference when you’re not sure that you're applying yet I am applying to an MSc program where I need to find an advisor prior to applying. I spoke to a potential advisor earlier this week for 45 minutes. She told me to take the holidays to think about it and to contact her in the new year and, if I’m interested, we could look at filling out the scholarship application (it requires a research proposal so she would help with that).

The scholarship application is due at the end of January. The application for the actual program is also due at the end of January. There is a specific form to fill out for the applications. I would like to ask 2 professors for references, however, nothing is “set in stone” for the applications. Maybe, for whatever reason, the potential advisor suddenly decides not to take me on, or I end up sending in the application after my referees give their reference.

Basically, I’m worried my referees would send in their part without my application. How should I ask for the references in an email?

I would tell them this.

  I'm thinking about applying to a master's program and for a scholarship.  The deadline is the end of January, so I have to decide
  soon.  If I decide to apply, would you be willing to provide a letter
  of reference?

  Here are the links: ...

  I've also attached copies of my unofficial transcript and my resume.  You
  have my permission to discuss any of this in any letter you decide to write.

Most of your instructors will likely have acted as references in the past and if it's just an LOR you need, they know how to do that.  Give links to  the program and scholarship pages so they can confirm the details of what's required.


Include personal link to poster in Graduate School CV I am currently editing my CV for grad school applications with Latex. In my list of conference presentations (posters and an oral), I have provided hyperlinks to arXiv citations of my abstracts, but I don't have a citation hyperlink available for one poster presented at two (1 state & regional) conferences.

Would it be considered unnecessary or weird to an Admissions Committee to include a Google Drive, for instance, to the actual poster? I feel like including it so that the committee can actually look at my research projects if they desire.

In general, anything that can help folks access your works easier from your CV is a good thing.  I include links in mine for any articles that are in open-access journals or conference papers that are in public archives.  For the poster, though, make sure it's well proofread and up to date research, I think - I wouldn't go back and put all your posters online, maybe just your most recent ones?


What are the main goals of administering preliminary / qualifying exams to graduate students? If I were a Spanish Major as an undergraduate and decide to pursue a PhD in a completely unrelated field (like Theoretical Physics), it makes sense to give a qualifying exam to check that I had the necessary skills to begin the program.  But if I'm coming from a B.S in math to a PhD program also in math, it doesn't seem to make sense to give a qualifying exam, as if the knowledge I gained in my undergraduate was insufficient.  I presume that one is accepted into a PhD program because he/she has already demonstrated the "qualifying" skills.  Thus, I'm baffled by the notion of the qualifying / prelim exam.   I'm curious about the ultimate goals of these exams, and how they relate to the professional development of a graduate student.

There are two types of qualifying/preliminary exams, those that cover graduate or undergraduate topics.  I assume you are just talking about the latter (while in my experience the former is a little more common).

As I see it, the big reason for preliminary exams on undergraduate material is that many students haven't actually mastered this material to a professional standard.  At less prestigious schools, many students won't have received straight A's (or the equivalent in other grading systems), so they had gaps or weaknesses in their understanding, and unless they took more advanced courses in the same area they may never have filled those gaps.  Furthermore, it's possible to get excellent grades without true mastery, and students sometimes forget things they knew while taking a course.

The preliminary exam sends a message of "OK, you're in grad school now, and as a professional you're expected to know this material cold.  If you have any doubts about your mastery of it, now is the time to study carefully."  The few students who don't need to study suffer little harm from the exams, and the students who do need to study benefit from the studying.


Plan for generating external funding I am preparing an application for a full-time lecturer position. They asked me for a teaching statement (done), a research statement (done) and a plan for generating funding for the next three years (trying now). I am a bit confused about this and I am not sure what they actually want with this funding plan. I could, of course, name all the different grant applications that I could potentially submit, but I am convinced that they are expecting more than that.

Any help?

Thanks!

What I would expect here is a (short) document where you describe how you plan to build up your lab in the next three years. Which personal grants to you plan to target? Do you have multiple options, or will you be all-in on one specific grant? Are there specific project calls or larger consortia where you could apply, and what makes you a good person to apply for them (i.e., this is a good place to brag about your network for participating in larger collaborations)? Are there other types of grants (for infrastructure, etc.) that are required or useful for the kind of work that you do? How will the different types of grants connect to form a larger research agenda?

All in all, I expect that the committee really wants to see (a) that  there are funding sources available that you can realistically apply to - ideally, these will be a combination of high-risk/high-reward calls (e.g., highly prestigious personal grants) and more conservative projects, and (b) that you are aware of the different funding sources and have a plan in mind how you will use them to build up  your group. Everybody understands that this is, at best, a declaration of intent - grants get rejected, new opportunities arise, and your research interests shift, so nobody will fault you if you, 3 years from now, have deviated greatly from this plan.


Can a first author omit the "equal contribution" for a publication on the CV? I am the first author of a paper where the first two authors (me and Y) have contributed equally. (Yay, thanks alphabet! Hopefully I won't have to collaborate with some Dr. Aaron Aab in the future.) Of course, Y will put an equal contribution note on their CV, and prominently so.

Do I have to?

Let's be clear: You are trying to claim more credit than you are due by omitting information. Phrased like this, does this sound ethical to you? If it does, you may want to re-consider your standards. If not, you got your answer.

As a general rule in life, of course, you want to be treated the way you treat others. That means being generous in your praise, and modest in your claims. In the current context, you can't reasonably be expected to only put the "equal contribution" asterisk only next to the other author, but you'd probably be annoyed if your coauthor reversed the order of first and second author in their CV. So don't do the equivalent on yours.


Problem in citation link in Google scholar I have uploaded a paper in eprint site. In my Google scholar, the citation  of my paper is addressed by the semanticscholar.org site.

My problem is that, I have revised my paper in eprint site, but in Google scholar, researchers can not access to this revision of paper, since semanticscholar.org did not update my paper to the new revision of paper. I contacted with the support system of semanticscholar.org, but after one month no change is happen. Moreover, when I search the title of paper in my Google scholar,   Google just present the semanticscholar link of my paper and dose not show its eprint link.

My Question: Is there a way to add the paper in my Google scholar with the its eprint link.

Thanks for any suggestions.

Google Scholar recommends to make publications available on a personal university webpage:

  If you're an individual author, it works best to simply upload your paper to your website, e.g., www.example.edu/~professor/jpdr2009.pdf; and add a link to it on your publications page, such as www.example.edu/~professor/publications.html.

Afaik, there is no way to request a particular repository or paper to be added/updated/deleted, the whole system is automatic.


Are master's degrees in the US mostly meant to prepare you for a Ph.D? I am a Canadian undergraduate student intending to get a master's degree, but not intending to get a Ph.D.

A Canadian graduate student told me that master's degree in the US are really only designed for people desiring to get a Ph.D.

Is there any truth to this statement? Do masters degrees in the US put significantly more emphasis on preparation for a Ph.D than in other countries?

There are two very different kinds of computer science master's degrees:

Professional master programs involve taking lots of classes, but have no research requirement.  These are almost universally considered (academically) terminal degrees.  The actual degree is usually not "M.S.", but something similar like "M.Eng." (Cornell) or "M.C.S." (UIUC).
Research masters programs require at least a modicum of original research, usually leading to a thesis.  These are generally (but not universally) considered preparation for a PhD program, because of the research component.  The actual degree is usually "M.S."  In some departments, the MS program is equivalent to MCS + thesis; in other programs, the MS program has different (usually smaller but more advanced) course requirements.

It is very important to know which type of master's program you are applying to.


Submitting a paper without your supervisor knowing, ask for help I am stuck and I need your experience, ideas, and help.

Background story. I have a supervisor who is giving me critics and always lowers my confidence. For example, when last year I wrote a paper for a workshop by myself, he told me I suggest you not to submit because you will burn your name and this is horrible works, etc. He then said if you insist on sending it don't put my name!!! He also didn't allow me to apply for a doctoral symposium (the most prestigious one, he said you won't benefit).
After a year, I was really disappointed in my own work, he was on holiday, and I thought my work is valueless. He also criticizes me for not publishing anything.

My issue:
He was on sick leave, there was a conference, and I had some work that if not for this conference, it would be useless for anywhere else. The conference is a C level(computer science) but the only conference in this area of work and all important people in the community are there. I wrote a paper, and because I was really disappointed I submitted it to get some feedbacks. I mentioned my intention of sending the paper to him in an email, probably he didn't see anyway. As a result, he wasn't there and I submitted the paper, now it got a conditional acceptance. This is my first time writing a paper and I was new to the submission. The conference was double blind, and that was why I submitted it anyway. I didn't know where I should put his name or how to submit, I did it anyway.

Problem:
Now I am scared to tell him about the conditional acceptance. Should I tell him or just refuse from doing the revisions and acceptance? How can I include his name(I thought initially it would be in the camera ready version, but the email says it is just me as the author)? What should I do?
Instead of being happy for my first paper,  I am worried and close to nervous breakdown. What should I do? Please help me.

Let's go through it one by one:

  How can I include his name?

I think he has already made his viewpoint quite clear, when you quote "I suggest you not to submit because you will burn your name and this is horrible works, etc. He then said if you insist on sending it don't put my name"

So, please don't do it. Any academician would be horribly pissed off if he saw his name appear on a scientific article which he himself deems "horrible", or in more polite language, unworthy of having his name on the author list. You are assuming some malicious intentions on his part, but please try to understand that he may have some very valid reasons for saying what he said.

You are only starting out, and are yet to make a name for yourself, but presumably he already has made one. It is a well known fact in academia that respected researchers would prefer not publishing to publishing a mediocre work. That's because, ultimately in academia, a person is only as good as his work. An average work would be taken to mean that the person doing it also has average abilities.

The last thing he would want is to have his reputation being smothered by an overzealous student, who went ahead and presented something prematurely, and puts it across as done by me under Professor ABC. Because then, it won't be about you and you work, it would be about Prof. ABC deeming a premature work as publication-worthy, which he never agreed to!

Thus, in all seriousness, since you are actually going ahead with the publication, you should do that without your supervisor's name.

  Now I am scared to tell him about the conditional acceptance. Should I tell him?

While you are not obligated to inform him, it is generally very bad etiquette to hold your supervisor in the dark about these things. Of course, revealing this will enrage him, of course you will draw flak. But that's still a better option than him discovering about this independently, or through other sources (he eventually will find out, one way or the other). And in that case, bridges will be burned completely. So, my advise would be, if you were courageous enough to actually go ahead and submit despite your supervisor telling you not to do so, you would burn lesser bridges by owning up the repercussions, rather than running away from it.

Having said that, be prepared to hear a response to the tune of I'm not going to participate in amending the manuscript now, please do it on your own. Which is completely reasonable. If it is helpful to think of it this way, you will also benefit from the confidence you will gain from making the changes yourself, and getting it published. So, better do it yourself.

Finally,

  (Should I) just refuse from doing the revisions and acceptance?

That would be extremely unprofessional behavior and will decimate your reputation. While manuscripts can be withdrawn, what exactly will you say is your withdrawl reason?

"The results are erroneous", then they shouldn't have been submitted in the first place.
"We realized the flaws later", that will present you as a person who saw an opportunity to publish and jumped the gun, particularly true if you do it as a single author.
"I have some other commitments", that's again silly for a PhD student with the little commitments they have besides their work; you should have foreseen whether or not you would be able to attend the conference, and only then gone ahead with the submission.
"Emergency situation excuse", well I have no words how to respond to that, and most likely the conference people would also not have any.
"No excuse", that's extremely unprofessional.

So, my advice would be, own up the publication, and please do not even contemplate this option.


It is alright to include students' first names in a teaching statement? Is it alright to include students' first names in a teaching statement, or would this come off as weird and too personal? Or a privacy concern?

You often hear the advice to include specific stories that exemplify some of the things you claim about yourself in your teaching statement. I've got an anecdote involving two students I want to tell. My thought is that including their names will demonstrate that this wasn't just some frivolous incident that I'm talking up; that I honestly got to know these students. Also, I think the story would read more clearly if I can give them names rather than pronouns.

I think you should avoid giving their full names, as opposed to just their first names unless they give permission for it. Better, using an alias for the students protects their privacy but doesn't cost you any thing in the telling of the stories. Alice and Bob, as usual.

But some readers might actually wonder whether you were too personal with the students, not keeping a proper "academic distance". I often tell a story about two students who succeeded after failure. It is a great story, and it works without names. If they heard my story they would recognize themselves, I think. But no one else would. Not even their classmates at the time.


APA subsequant citation for two different studies with same first author and same year I have a question with regards to APA in-text citations. I wanted to cite 2 studies (with 3 authors for each article) that are of the same first author and same year. I have no problem with the initial in-text citation but the issue arise when I am using subsequent citations for both of these studies.

For example,
1. I have a study by John, Tom, and Harry (2014),
2. as well as another study by John, Gary, and Frod (2014).

Now, since there are 3 authors, subsequent citation for 1. should be John et. al (2014). However, for 2., the subsequent citation will also be John et. al (2014). Therefore, I am quite confused about what I should do in this situation. Any help is appreciated. Thank you in advance!

This page from the APA says to just write them out with the number of authors necessary to distinguish them on the second and subsequent citations. So, for yours, I think you would do: (John, Tom, and Harry, 2014) and (John, Gary, and Frod, 2014). Since the second name is enough to distinguish, you could stop there, but "et al." and just listing the third name are equivalent, so you list the name.


Is a researcher with the same name in a different field likely to cause confusion? I would like to get some advice on what may or may not be a problem, namely the lack of unique identifiers for scientific authors.

So there is a researcher with the same first and last name as myself, who works in a different field (physics vs computer science), but is in a similar stage of academic career (PhD candidate).

Are there potential problems? Is there a danger that publications are associated wrongly, with negative consequences for either one of the authors? Will this cause confusion in databases like arXiv?

What would you suggest?

don't care?
disambiguate by adding middle initials to future publications?
...

When I add initials for future publications, is there a change that I might somehow "lose" 3 earlier publications?

First, you don't lose anything by adding initials. They will make it easier to search for your name in databases, until the day comes when academia has a unique/canonical researcher ID scheme in place.

If you have a middle name (or middle names), you can use those. If you don't, just choose a "pen name" by adding initials, chosen to make the combination of your name + initials unique (for now, of course… you cannot do anything about someone having the same name and starting to publish in a few years). I recommend doing that.

What can happen is that other people searching for your publications in the future might miss your first three papers. But if you have a publication list on your webpage (you have a webpage, right?), it's no big deal. Also, three seems like a large number now, but it will not always be that way.


Can a blind person do a post-doc in the humanities? I’m about to finish my PhD in Sociology. I’m from Pakistan, and I’m totally blind. My PhD research was quite interdisciplinary. I studied factors influencing environmental concern about environmental problems in Pakistan, as well as factors influencing environmental behavior at home. Now I want to do a post doctorate from anywhere in Europe, North America, Australia or New Zealand.

Can my blindness be a factor in acceptance / rejection of my application?

If not, what should be my first step for finding a post doctoral opportunity? My research interest is in the domains of environmental sociology and environmental psychology.

In the United States there's what is known as the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)

which prohibits discrimination based on disabilities and mandates reasonable accomodations. Full or partial blindness will definitely fall under that category, and so they are legally prohibited from discriminating against you and if hired will work with you to help out. Many other locations have similar laws. In Canada the laws vary from province to province, but most of Canada has similar laws. Many (although not all) European countries have similar laws or regulations as well.


Do papers ever get published posthumously? What is the longest discrepancy between death and publication?

The paper

  Radcliffe, J. M. "Some properties of coherent spin states." Journal of Physics A: General Physics 4.3 (1971): 313

was submitted in 1970, published in 1971, and contains the following:

At the time of writing this post, the paper has 951 Google citations.

There is no hint as to the date of the passing of Prof. Radcliffe but it is the only publication by this author on MathSciNet; it is entirely possible that Prof. Radcliffe could have published in Journals not covered by MathSciNet.  The Mathematical Genealogy project contains references to a single John Radcliffe who graduated from University of London in 1967, but the general area of the thesis and the aforementioned work do not match very well.

Anyways, this is clearly an example of posthumous publication not done in collaboration.


Improve letter of recommendation after graduation? I have been not the most vocal student and wasn't talking to the professors much after class. Much of this was because I was quite shy at the time. I have now graduated and would like to ask for an academic reference. My final grade was quite good, so my position is not that bad. I just wasn't so active in class.

Question : I am asking myself whether there are ways to improve a potential recommendation after having graduated. Like, for example, through email correspondence, or sending the professor a paper I wrote, etc.? Or should this ideally not influence the professor anymore?

What could I do? Or this generally a bad idea?

PS: Note that I am not asking to build a recommendation entirely after graduation, but to improve it somewhat.

First of all, although in all cases it would have been better for you to talk to your professors outside of class and cultivate further intellectual/professional relationships with them, how much better depends a lot on the situation.  For instance, in my academic field of mathematics, a student at a strong program who quietly does superior work in the most challenging courses available to her is going to get strong to very strong letters irrespective of the personal contact.   In other academic fields, the most promising undergraduates will likely have some engagement with the research interests of the faculty, perhaps even to the extent of coauthorship on papers, and missing out on that may be missing out on a lot.

  I am asking myself whether there are ways to improve a potential recommendation after having graduated.

It becomes a lot harder to improve your professors' opinions of you after you leave, for the obvious reasons: you have no more necessary points of contact with them, and they are no longer getting paid to teach and interact with you.  Some faculty members are very generous with their time, but many faculty members
have packed their professional life with so many other activities that they literally don't have the time for more than casual interactions with former undergraduates.

  Like, for example, through email correspondence, or sending the professor a paper I wrote, etc.?

You can try both of those things.  Sending a paper you wrote that has some connection to the research interests of the professor in question sounds more promising to me than simply trying to raise their esteem via the enthusiasm and erudition of your epistles.  (Sorry, I got a little carried away with the alliteration.) As above, a faculty member may not have time to do more than briefly glance at your paper...but even the brief glance of a professional can convince them that you're onto something and improve your letter.

  Or should this ideally not influence the professor anymore?

No, you're fully entitled to take further steps to get a better letter.  That may be hard to do, but the attempt is fully appropriate.  Faculty will probably realize what you're doing (which is also okay...).


Can I publicly mention my paper once it is accepted? Since the paper first got submitted anonymized but is accepted now, can I add it to my publications or do I have to wait until the conference?

In general, this may depend on cultural expectations in your research community and the legal requirements imposed by the publisher.  But for computer science conference papers published by ACM: As soon as your paper is accepted, you an add it to your list of publications, and you can post a copy of the paper online.

Once a paper is accepted, its acceptance is a fact that you can include in your CV and/or your online list of publications.  I have never heard of a computer science conference or journal publisher imposing a press embargo on the existence of a future publication.

ACM's copyright policy explicitly acknowledge authors' rights to post their papers online, even before the paper is accepted, including the following:

  Post the Accepted Version of the Work on (1) the Author's home page, (2) the Owner's institutional repository, (3) any repository legally mandated by an agency funding the research on which the Work is based, and (4) any non-commercial repository or aggregation that does not duplicate ACM tables of contents, i.e., whose patterns of links do not substantially duplicate an ACM-copyrighted volume or issue. Non-commercial repositories are here understood as repositories owned by non-profit organizations that do not charge a fee for accessing deposited articles and that do not sell advertising or otherwise profit from serving articles.
  Prior to commencement of the ACM peer review process, post the version of the Work as submitted to ACM ("Submitted Version") to non-peer reviewed servers;

In particular, non-commercial repositories in point (4) include arXiv.  (ACM asks for copyright transfer only after papers are accepted, so I'm not convinced that the second bullet is anything other than an acknowledgement that ACM can't control what they don't own.)  However, note that the Accepted Version is different from the Version of Record, or as human beings call it, the camera-ready version—the one that ACM actually publishes.

From a practical standpoint, however, very few computer scientists actually care what ACM or any other publisher thinks.  A significant majority of computer science research papers are available online, either on the author's web page, in some institutional repository, or on arXiv.  You are not only legally allowed to post your work, you are culturally expected to do so.  Although ACM and other CS publishers claim the legal right to go after authors for posting camera-ready papers without permission, they have shown no interest in actually doing so, and there would be a huge community backlash if they did.


How to deal with a supervisor who doesn't care research and students? I'm in the social science discipline. This is the fourth year of my PhD. I'm in the process of writing up my dissertation. However, my supervisor is very lay back. He doesn't care much about my research. On average, it took 2 weeks for me to receive his feedback, but, sometimes, his feedback was not constructive. He often forgot what he said before and contradicted himself. I am very emotionally stressed. I hope to defend my thesis successfully and soon, but I don't see that happening. Any idea about how should I deal with him?

So, let's guess, an older professor, winding down from research and looking toward retirement. He likes you, but doesn't provide much of any help.

This isn't an impossible situation, unlike many others reported here. In fact, if his reputation, based on past work is good, you may be able to escape successfully and start your own career.

The essential things you need from an advisor is the willingness to sign of on your work so that you get a degree and the willingness to write you good recommendation letters for your first job at least. Anything more than that is helpful and, for some students more of a requirement than others.

It is possible to lean too heavily on an advisor for ideas and direction. Some students need that. But others can work on their own, or even find outside direction to bounce ideas off of and get some feedback. If you are self directed, or can force yourself to be self directed until you finish you can still wind up successful.

It would be a problem if he severely criticizes your work or says it has little value, but it is sort of common to be a bit uninvolved at the end of a career. Some of us are even a bit looney. But, if you can find a way to carry on and the "essentials" are in place then I wouldn't worry too much about it.

Keep him involved to the extent he is willing. Mine his knowledge as much as you can, especially for contacts elsewhere who work in the same field. He may be able to help you build a network, even if he isn't a lot of help on your research problem.


Must I share my transcripts with my supervisor? I am in the data analysis phase of my Phd Dissertation. My supervisor has demanded that I share my transcripts with them so they can "help me" analyze my data. I do not want their help analyzing my data. Must I take this help, and must I share the transcripts with them? I fear they are going to try to use the data in their own research, which is not unheard of for them.

I think there are two questions here: 1) if you need to share your data with your supervisor and 2) what happens if they use it in their own research.

To question #1: The answer to this is yes as they are in a supervisory role and part of their job is to help guide you in your development as a scientist. This is also not an unusual request in my experience. Keeping data secret from your PhD supervisor would also complicated possible publication of said data in a peer reviewed journal. The usual standard around publication ethics hold that all authors are responsible for the entirety of the manuscript and in order for them to bear that responsibility they have access to whatever part they want to see: https://www.etikkom.no/en/library/topics/authorship-and-co-authorship/authorship-and-co-authorship-in-medical-and-health-research/

That said if your supervisor is absolutely not involved in your project and would not be a co-author on any publication or you don't trust your supervisor to act in a fair way then I think that there is a larger issue that is beyond the ability of strangers on the internet to give you advice on. My recommendation would be to go talk to your supervisor about this situation and if you are uncomfortable doing that then I would recommend you seek out someone who you can trust in your department/at your university and try to explore your options.

2) It is not uncommon for data to be reused in different publications. In the extreme example the entire concept of a meta-analysis is reanalyzing existing publications. So having your supervisor use your data for a different analysis/research project is normal. That being said they need to cite your publication as the source for the data and if you significantly contribute to their research then they should add you as a coauthor. If they fail to cite your publication/thesis as the source of the data then they are engaging in misconduct.


Is Research Fellow a gender-neutral term? For me, it feels slightly clumsy to say I'm a Research Fellow without actually being a fellow (defined as a male person).  Nevertheless, it's unsurprising to have female research fellows at universities.

Q: Is Research Fellow a gender-neutral term?

With this question, I'm seeking a way to understand why no-one seems to mind using "research fellow" to describe non-males.  Perhaps there's some etymology to the term that would clarify things.

Yes, in your reference, the third definition is the one being used, rather than the first:

a member of a group of people who have shared interests, activities, etc.

Of course, we should look to how the word is actually used rather than solely to its dictionary definition, but in this case I think that actually makes the argument even stronger, since academics use the neutral form quite a lot and nobody else (at least in my part of the world) seems to care for the word.


What do I do when a co-author takes too long to give feedback during the peer review process? Two years ago I did a piece of research for a journal's especial edition. I got the reviewer's comments, did all the corrections and sent it to my co-authors. One of them took so long to return his comments that the paper wasn't included in the EE. I then tried to submit it to another journal but again the same co-author took long time to provide his comments. Finally my boss suggested me to submit it to another journal (good one) without waiting for my co-author's opinion. I got the reviewer's comments back, I did all the corrections (I have 45 days), sent it to my co-authors and gave them a week to send me their comments. The same co-author is now telling me he's not happy I didn't tell him I submitted to that journal and that he won't be able to make comments in a week. I'm again in a catch-22. What do you do?

It seems you are following your boss' (good) advice. Dealing with co-authors is not always easy as you have experienced. I think I have experienced a similar co-author, not responding but complaining whenever something happens. In my case, the co-author was definitely over-committed and the actions were basically a symptom of frustration about not being able to perform. Now, I think you have done the right thing to a point. The only thing that would have improved things would have been to provide the co-author with the information but with a strict deadline but not more than a week or two. Doing so at all stages, is the only way to deal with such cases. It is not very nice, or comfortable, but it is necessary to make a stand and convey the seriousness. In your case you have clearly had a lot of extra work due to the (lack of) actions from your co-author. I assume he has not apologized?

So what to do? Well, I would write and state that you are sorry the co-author feels left out (or however the co-author has phrased it). You can then state that the lack of response earlier made you assume the co-author was not prioritizing the work and that based on suggestions from your boss you have now taken the actions you have to get the material published. Be brief and courteous but do not add many excuses.


Sending a paper to a 'Letters' journal I am at the cusp of finishing my PhD, and my advisor and I have decided that it is time to publish since there seems to be no hole in the theories that I propose. I have always maintained that I'd like to get a publication in the good letters section such as Physical Review Letters and then submit a longer manuscript to a more specific journal (in my field that would be the Physics of Fluids). My advisor isn't a fan of arXiv as he see it only for preprints with little advantage as it would be easier to just circulate my manuscript among 10-15 established people in the field.

So my question is/questions are:

Is it useful to send in a manuscript to a letters section of a prestigious journal such as the PRL for quick dissemination of my work as well as brownie points for having published in the PRL despite a really high rejection rate.
Are letters section of journals really quick (with a short submission to publication time)?
As a contingency plan, a rejection would mean what exactly to my career/immediate future?
I have always had a soft spot for arXiv since several important works were first disseminated on it but I find that in the engineering community there is still some resistance to arXiv, any comments?

As a side note, I have read the several questions about arXiv on academia.SE and somehow I am not entirely convinced that a young academecian would gain much from publishing in arXiv than in a regular journal.

I cannot answer the first question, because it depends mostly of the result itself (if it is strong enough, interesting for reasonably wide audience and can make sense when condensed to 4 pages).

Take a look at Length of publication cycle for peer-reviewed journals from Physics.SE; in on of the answers there are mentioned the following slides:

Thomas Pattard, How to publish your work in the Physical Review or Editors are from Mars, Referees are from Venus, and Authors are from Earth

In short, it takes longer for PRL than most of other PR journals (except for PRE). The difference for Rapid Communications is the highest.

When it comes to risk of rejection - AFAIK the only bad thing for you is that you loose some time. There is no "rejected from PRL stigma" - again, AFAIK.

When it comes to arXiv - it may mean a lot for you (remember, you do it not instead of publishing in a journal, but along with):

it becomes visible a few days after uploading,
some people actively follow arXiv RSS feed on their topic (or even start each morning with it),
some people don't have access to all paid journals,
some people even claim that "normal" publication didn't influenced their cite counts once their paper went on arXiv.

So, even before it gets published (which will take at least a few months, and in case of rejections or slow journals - even years) it is visible.

And personally, I had a lot of scientific discussions based on my papers that by that time were 'only' on arXiv. If you are going to hunt for a postdoc position there may be a big difference whether they can see your paper (on arXiv) or "you said them that you had sent it".


Is it okay if I provide my personal email address on my paper instead of my institutional one? I'm going to submit a paper with my name as the "corresponding author". I am going to be using my personal email address instead of my university one.
This is because I am an undergrad and my institutional address will become invalid after I graduate.
Questions:

Is this okay?
Will it cause any administrative issues?
Is this practice seen anywhere else?

If it makes any difference, this will be a journal paper.

It is ok to use e-mails other than institutional (academic) addresses in your publications, but there are some points to consider if you're planning to do so:

Availability/reliability: you want other researchers/readers to be able to find you. The paper will hopefully be available for a long time (forever?), and it is impressive how much visibility and opportunities you can get years after a good publication;
Keep a professional address: It may sound silly, but some people insist on having funny e-mails and use them professionally. It does not look good. Also, if you plan to have a professional e-mail for years to come, I recommend registering a domain and have control over the address, even if you plan to SMTP to Gmail or similar services;
Some universities keep email accounts (or forwarding services) for alumni (McGill is one example). It is good for them (you feel more secure in using your institutional address) and for you (people can contact you long after you graduate). Of course, that means periodically check the account or make sure forwarding is properly configured.
University policy: check your university policy. Some institutions require specific affiliation statements and using institutional emails for publications related to them, especially if the research is funded by the institution.


How to "tailor" the statement of purpose for a particular grad school A prospective graduate student is normally not hyperspecialized and inflexibly hyperfocussed on a certain well-developed research line (like a more mature mid-career researcher could be) just yet.

That is to say, even if such student worked on topic "X" (say, in the area of algebraic geometry) for their master's thesis, they may well be flexible and willing to expand their horizon and start working on any interesting topic in algebraic geometry that falls within a certain wide range "A" (that possibly includes "X").

So, I assume, any school which is (1) reasonably prestigious, (2) conveniently located, (3) endowed with "good" mathematicians that work on a quite wide range "A" of topics within algebraic geometry is in principle a good fit for an application of said student. Any other reasons are (at least in my opinion) less relevant.

In this context, what does it mean to tailor a statement of purpose for a specific school?

In particular, how can one convincingly and professionally show that a certain school is a great fit for his academic career and education?

I have heard that the "Why is our university a good fit for you?" question for a statement of purpose is just a way of checking if a student has "done his homework". But what is that actually supposed to mean?

I have been involved in graduate admissions for a quite a few years. Answer below is based on that experience.

This question about fit is a way to make sure that you know approximately what you are getting yourself into.

You do not have to stroke professors' egos by telling how great they are. It does not help your application. If you have interest or past experience in some area, mention it of course, but do not engage in gratuitous flattery. Instead we want to know why this school is suitable to you at all. For example, if you are interested in doing mostly algebraic geometry, but are applying to a department that has no algebraic geometers, this would be a poor fit. If there is a reason you like the location (e.g. a significant other working nearby, or cheap flights home), it does not hurt saying so either.

What we want to avoid is to have a 3rd or 4th year graduate student drop out because they cannot find an advisor in their preferred area, and are utterly unhappy because of location or because of something else.

In general, the statement of purpose is your opportunity to present evidence that you will make a good researcher one day. That includes your scientific background, various personal traits as demonstrated by your past, and your accomplishments. See an excellent answer to another question by JeffE for more details.


Professor/supervisor switches from writing emails in his native and local language to English - how to react? A professor of mine, who's native language is German and who is teaching a class in English in a German speaking country, suddenly answered an e-mail which I wrote in German (I'm a native German speaker too), in English. I'm wondering why he does that? What the proper way for me to react is, i.e., should I use English when sending him e-mails from now on?

I wouldn't worry about it too much: given the bilingual nature of his work, your professor probably context-switches back and forth between languages frequently.  If the professor is very comfortable in both languages, they might not have even realized the switch, e.g., if responding to your email in the middle of a large block of work in English with their head in "English-mode".

If you want, however, next time you see the professor in person, you might ask if they have any preference for language in their communications with you: it could easily go either way (e.g., in English to make forwarding to non-German speakers easier, in German for personal comfort, or even no preference at all).


Stress and anxiety while waiting for PhD viva I submitted my PhD thesis more than a month ago. I was told by the Postgraduate Department that I would have my oral examination in six weeks. It's been six weeks already and I haven't heard any news. I heard from former students that in some cases, the viva could take up to three months to be held.

I am so stressful right now. I have been unemployed for more than 6 months now and I am running out of money. Currently, I am living with my parents to cover my expenses. While they welcome my living with them, they seem to be disappointed that I have yet to land a job. Not to mention I have to worry about my viva as well. I have unsuccessfully applied for jobs while waiting for the viva. Most employers didn't want to hire me because they viewed me as overqualified and they thought I would leave the job once I obtained my Ph.D.

I have reached out to my supervisor to get the information when my viva will be but she said it all depended on examiners. It's so disappointing to know how unprofessional my examiners are. I know they are busy with their work but to think that I paid a large sum of money to get my thesis examined, it's just so unacceptable. Does anyone know what should I do?

EDIT: Large sum of money refers to thesis examination fee. My university increased thesis examination fee by two-fold to get faster feedback from examiners. Although my university has changed its policy in viva examination by making it faster hence increment in thesis fee, it still disappointing to find out that it stays the same.

Unfortunately, there isn't all that much you can do except to have the people responsible for ensuring reviews are turned in contact the examiners and get them to turn in their reviews of the thesis.

Complaining to the examiners directly will do little good, and your thesis supervisor may or may not have the clout to get your examiners to turn in their reviews.

However, you should be applying for Ph.D.-appropriate jobs right now, so that you're able to move into something once the oral examination is finished. Supervisors of jobs normally taken by Ph.D. recipients will typically recognize that there might be some delays in getting the degree, but will still hire people close to finishing their degree.


Why do some fellowships require "leadership experience"? The fellowship I'm about to apply requires me to express my past leadership experience in the personal statement. Why? I understand that leadership is a soft skill that everyone should have, but this is academia, not business. People in this environment put cooperating before leading. Of course, even in business, there is no group that work like in military, the person in low level still can suggest idea and change the leader/manager's mind. The role of the leader is inspire and amalgamate separate people to one united unit. But in academia, everyone should inspire themselves, and the science itself are the glue to attach people together, right? So why don't these fellowships require me to show my past cooperation, rather than leadership?

Precisely because we cooperate a lot, we need good leadership. A good leader is someone who can bring the best of everyone in the group. For example, encouraging everyone to voice their ideas, assessing which ones have actual value, but without making the group pursue all the wild geese. A good leader should also be able to recognise the strong points in the members of the team and assign tasks accordingly.

I accept that everyone here should be motivated, but it is important for the group to keep it up. No matter how eager I am, if my professor were to start giving me contradictory orders, unreasonable workloads, or dismissing my ideas without explaining why, I can tell you, I would not remain that motivated after four years. After all, I can be motivated to work "in the grand scheme of sciency things", but not necessarily in the particular group I am in.


The full understanding of my bachelor's thesis requires the reader to watch a movie, how do I deal with that? I'm currently putting the finishing touches on my bachelor's thesis. One part of that thesis is an analysis of a movie. I have written a short synopsis of the movie to go with it, however that is probably not enough for a complete understanding of the points I make in my analysis. I can't make the summary substantially longer as I have already reached the upper character limited set by my university for the bachelor's thesis. But I also believe that a written summary, however detailed, can not replace having watched the movie, as I'm talking about fine detail of the graphic style and aesthetics which can't be fully described using text only. In my analysis, I also reference other movies of the same director and explain how some topics and metaphoras are used in those as well as in the movie I'm analyzing.

I am not sure how to deal with this. I can't just ask my professor to watch several movies in order to understand my analysis. But I also don't want to be graded badly because my analysis requires the reader to have watched the film (I believe that this is true of any detailed analysis of any work, so it's not just a flaw in my thesis that I should correct).

Here's what I have done so far:

I've included screenshots of the Blu-Ray release of the movie to illustrate some of my points.
There's a footnote at the end of my summary of the film that explains that this summary doesn't replace watching the actual movie and having not watched it might hinder the comprehension of the following analysis.
At the first mention of another movie, there's another footnote that contains a link to the official website of the director, which has detailed synopses of the mentioned movies. However, those can't replace the actual movies either.

I have thought about including a digital version of the movie when I turn in the thesis, but I don't think it's a good idea. I don't know if the assay office would even accept it, and even though I own the DVD-version of the movie, it would probably not be legal to give out copies. Also this wouldn't solve the problem when I put the thesis up on my website.

So how do I deal with this? Do I just ignore it as there is no better solution? Or is there a standard way of mentioning prerequisites for the understanding of a thesis?

I understand that I can include the movies in the list of references or just make it a separate list. However, the books that I reference in my thesis are not required to understand the points I make, as book references usually include the relevant quotes or repeat the points made by the authors. So I am not sure if this is sufficient.

I don't think I see a problem here.

If you were writing a literary analysis of Jane Eyre, you wouldn't include the full text of the novel in your paper, and it'd be entirely reasonable to expect the reader to read the novel in order to understand your paper.  I don't see why a film should be any different.

Your professor can, and should, watch the film, and any others they find necessary in order to make sense of your analysis.  That's not an unreasonable thing to expect, it's just part of their job, like any other background reading they might need to do.  If you can lend them your DVD, or tell them how to otherwise get it, that would be a nice courtesy.

Other readers will have to make out as best they can.  It might be nice to list on your website some ways they could acquire the film (Amazon link, Netflix availability, etc) but again this is more a courtesy than an academic requirement.

But to really cut the knot: Just ask your professor. They are in the best position to advise you, both on the academic standards of your field as to the content of the thesis, and as to what resources would be helpful to them personally in evaluating it.


Should I take admissions to this phd programme? I get selected in Phd course. My area of interest is cloud security. There are two lectures whose area of interest is cloud security. I requested one of the supervisor,  who has good record and has good publications,  to take me as her phd student. She said that she doesn't have the vacant seat now but after 6 month she can have 1 vacant seat. She talked with another lecturer to be my supervisor and  said that in these, 6 month, she will evaluate my performance and based on that she will make decisions. So, after 6 months, if she likes my performance,  I can have two supervisor in which one is my original supervisor (which is mam to whom I requested) and another mam is my co-supervisor. If she doesn't like my performance,  I can have only  another lecturer as  my supervisor.

The problem is that she is not 100% percent sure and she will evaluate me during this 6 months.  I want that mam (to whom I requested) to be my supervisor as she has good knowledge and publications in good journals. Should I continue with this phd or quit?
Any guidance will surely help.

To me this arrangement is the greatest chance you could get to work under the supervision of whom you requested in the future. Since you have such strong orientation towards that particular supervisor (at least the way I see it), I think you should take the offer.

However, if all you want is to secure a good Ph.D. position, you should take into account whether you are ready to accept the worst case scenario, which is she refuse to take you in and you have to work under the supervision of the other supervisor. If this is the case, none of us here can help you in the decision making.