Is it okay to mention the potential advisor's name in my personal statement? I have already established contact with my potential advisor. Would it be appropriate to mention his name in my personal statement? Would doing so be looked upon negatively by the admissions committee?

It's perfectly acceptable to mention a potential supervisor's name, especially if they already know who you are. Indeed, many places that I applied to specifically requested that I include the name of a potential supervisor, either in the personal statement or elsewhere on the application.

In doing so, the admissions committee can see whether you've done your homework on the research that goes on at their institution (for example, it's no good writing down the name of someone who works on observing supernovae to then say that you're interested in theoretical research on modified gravity models).


Associate Editorship in a high-impact journal Is an Associate Editorship in a good journal a very busy position? Should junior faculties at the very early stage (i.e. at the time of joining the department as a faculty) put an effort of being an associate editor in a high-impact journal?
Or two or three years after working as a faculty, one should get into these editorial activities? To get tenure on the way down the road, how helpful this role is?

In my field, associate editors are not usually positions you apply for.  Someone (usually someone else on the editorial board or from the journal staff) recommends you for the position on the basis of your reputation or previous work done with the journal, v.g. member of an advisory panel, long history of refereeing for the journal, i.e. you have to be a known entity.

Depending on the level of support, it can be quite time-consuming, especially if you want to do a good job, v.g consider going beyond the referees recommended by the system or by the authors, keep everything on track.  I would ration myself only to so-many manuscript at once or else this would become all-consuming time wise.


How to offset poor undergraduate performance in core classes? I recently did not do so well in a couple undergraduate core classes, what are my options to make up for this on a grad school application?

I will answer the first question here.

If the course you're skipping is a "mandatory" course in your major, then taking advanced courses to make up for the earlier failures is not sufficient unless you get the necessary approvals to do so. (Usually there is some sort of departmental advisor whom you can petition.) However, I should mention that given your past record, it is quite likely that such a request will be denied.


How should I list my advisor's name on a talk I am giving about our joint work? I am very new to this...

I need to give a short talk at a conference soon, on which I am going to talk about something my advisor and I work on together.  Alphabetically, he should go before me, but would it be confusing since I am the one giving the talk?

Should I just list my name and put "Joint Work with xxx" on the title page?

A common way to address this kind of problems is to highlight on the title slide who is the speaker among the authors (e.g., by underlining, bolding or by assigning a different colour).

For instance, you can write the list of authors as

  A. Boss, H. Student


What does the "final published version" refer to in copyright? I'm trying to figure out if I can put a PDF that I give Springer on arXiv.
Note that this PDF has had further changes made to it after it has been already accepted by a conference; it's not the same as the conference submission.

Springer's copyright transfer form says:

  Prior versions of the Contribution published on non-commercial pre-print servers like ArXiv/CoRR and HAL can remain on these servers and/or can be updated with Author’s accepted version.
  The final published version (in pdf or html/xml format) cannot be used for this purpose.
  Acknowledgment needs to be given to the final publication and a link must be inserted to the published Contribution on Springer’s website, by inserting the DOI number of the article in the following sentence:
  "The final publication is available at Springer via http://dx.doi.org/[insert DOI]".

...but I can't tell what "the final published version" refers to.

Does it include the final PDF that I submit to them for publishing?
Or is it only the official PDF that they actually publish on their site?

(I presume the two could be different, since they could make their own edits?)

My guess is that it's only the latter, since they seem to imply the final version is the one with the DOI, but I'm not sure.

The usual workflow with Springer is:

You prepare your paper, and submit it as a PDF file to the conference.
The conference reviews the paper, and you get the acceptance notification + conference reviews back.
You revise your paper, and submit the source code to Springer.
Springer does copyediting, and you get the page proofs back.
You check the page proofs and submit your corrections to Springer.
Springer prepares the final PDF and posts it on their web page.

(Note that steps 1–3 involve work from you + research community. Steps 4–6 involve some added value from the publisher.)

The "author-created version" refers to your output after step 1 or 3. This is what you can self-archive.

The "final published version" refers to Springer's output after step 6. This is a version you cannot self-archive.

(IANAL, etc.)


Can I challenge a paper already published in a peer reviewed conference/journal? I recently came across several papers in the area of Information Extraction and Data Mining which seem to have passed the review process even if they (1) use some new terminology without describing it, (2) replicate some old and popular technique and just describe it in a new way, (3) use new datasets without releasing them publicly or describing them in detail, (4) confusing language that doesn't seem to describe the methods... and much more.

Why challenge them? Such papers give these people a kind of leverage in situations where number of publications count rather than quality of genuine work. They also encourage, let's say, 'pseudoscience' within the scientific community - or fraud, as those more experienced among you say.

I've faced situations like:-

Someone hired me from a freelance site to implement a previously published paper. The paper doesn't adequately describe the novel methods they claim. I spend a week on it but don't get paid.
Similar situation but the implementation's accuracy doesn't match the claim.
In a semi-academic gathering (tea time in a summer school), a discussion turned into a debate. Though I wasn't involved in it, one of the others said something which I pointed out as being logically wrong. It turned personal and one of them claimed that they knew better because of having twice the number of papers than me. Later when I read their papers I found that they didn't contain any ideas that would count as a genuine research.

I guess some of you might have been in similar situations before. Yes it doesn't matter in the longer term; but it is hard to avoid some situations like this and I think it might be hampering the research community as a whole.

Here are the exact points of my question:

Should we confront such publications? Would we get anything out of it?
Is it even feasible?
How can I do so? What actions are possible in such cases? What is the best course of action?

p.s. Yes citations matter more than just throwing papers - but such publications also get citations from other equally content-less papers published in similar conferences.

pps. Most of these papers are from less-than-tier-3 level conferences but still published by top publishers like IEEE and Springer.

I think you have to further examine your motivation for wanting to “challenge” these substandard papers.  All of the following are reasons which are suggested in your question.

You feel that contentless or decisively problematic publications bring down the quality of the academic community as a whole.
You feel that the people who are publishing these works get too much credit.
In particular, they are holding themselves up as superior to you.
Specific people – e.g. you – suffer when you try to rely on publications which do not do what they promise.

This is a lot to answer, but I’ll take a stab at it:

This is a disturbing trend in the world of academic publication.  I now get more “journal spam” emails than all other spam put together (well, counting only what makes it into my inbox).  One can no longer assume that an academic publication is reputable, legitimate, or sincere in any way without having prior specific knowledge of the people and institutions involved.  I think this is a terrible problem, but it's well beyond my pay grade.  I do not have a solution in mind.

The best revenge is living well. In line with point 1, there is an increasing segment of the worldwide academic community in which people, in order to maintain their very low-paying academic jobs, simply must meet a certain quota of authorship.  No one cares about the content or quality; in many cases there is no infrastructure there for them to evaluate the content if they did care.  This is very sad.  At an individual level, what seems best to me is just to get out of this part of the academic community.  In many cases this is best accomplished by relocating to a different part of the world where the academic infrastructure exists.  You are not going to get a job at a research university in the United States by having 50 bullshit papers: that's just not the way things work here.  However, if you are a scholar in India, you can get offered a job in the United States (or Europe or Japan or...) on the basis of your work: it just has to actually be very good.

The person who tells you that he’s right and you’re wrong because he has twice as many papers as you is on the one hand an asshole.  On the other hand, he’s splashing around in a pond that you want to get out of: I can assure you that there are many academic environments in which who's right is not decided by counting publications.  You sound like a serious person: get yourself into one of these environments.

This seems to open up another can of worms, but relative to point 1 above: you simply cannot uncritically take publications at face value.  To be honest about it, you can do this to a greater or lesser degree according to the level of trust and esteem you place in the author, the journal, the institution...but doing this at all is a compromise we make only because we are finite beings living in an imperfect world.  Learn to develop a “nose” for what is correct and what is problematic.  Definitely do not accept a work-for-pay situation which is predicated on the assumption that an unvetted academic work does everything that it promises!
In general, I would say that point 4 is a good reason to challenge papers: if you sstumbled by relying on a paper or can imagine another serious, reputable person doing the same, then you owe it to the community to try to get the word out about the defects of the work.  But as above you should also understand that part of being a good academic is knowing what looks good and what looks bad.  There is an ever-expanding sewage sea of worse-than-useless academic papers.  You can't take responsibility for getting rid of all of them.  But you can teach yourself to avoid the unpleasant experience of being submerged in this sewage sea, and you can teach your colleagues – and, as you get older, your mentees – how to do the same.

Good luck.


Is it reasonable for an anonymous reviewer to add the completion date to their report to show they completed the review in a timely manner? As a referee, I like to submit my reports in a timely fashion in order to avoid unnecessary delays in the publication (and also because I hate when referees spend months and months reviewing my papers). However, I have noticed that sometimes the journal does not make a decision on the paper until several months or weeks later. I have an example when I submitted my report in July and the decision was made in November. I was wondering if it would be correct/ethical to put the date on my report in order to show the authors that my report was submitted on time, even if I am an anonymous referee, and that other referees or the editors are to blame for any delays.

Would it be "correct" or "ethical"? Probably.

Would it do anything? Probably not. There are often reasons for a review to come in late, and some of them are not just "The reviewer is a slacker". Beyond that, the editorial staff at a journal has their own discretion beyond just "What do the reviewers say?", and that can (and should) take time.

Assuming you're anonymous, I can't really see an upside as an annoyed author of a delayed paper behind knowing that "It's totally not Reviewer 2's fault".


No reply after almost two months since the first interview At the beginning of March I applied for a postdoc position that was very close to the research topic of my PhD. I also sent an email to the Professor who posted the position in order to persuade him of my qualifications and my willingness to obtain the position.
On the 18th of March he replied to my email and we scheduled a zoom meeting on the 22nd of March. The meeting went well, and he told me that there will be another formal meeting after a month (around 22nd of April). However, the 22nd passed and no meeting took place.
After I sent him another email on the 27th of April, he told me that there have been issues related to the funding at the faculty level and everything has been delayed, and that they promised him he will get an update in the next few days, he also promised he will keep me updated.
However, to this day I have not received any updates regarding the situation, and I am confused as to whether I need to contact him again. I don't want to look rude nor pesky, but I really want things to move forward and do the second interview as soon as possible.
Should I contact him now or should I wait more? I believe the next few days means 3-5 days and should not exceed one week, but this is now the third week and I am still waiting.

Yes, you can ask about the status. And you can ask again for an estimate of the time to resolution of any problems, though it may not be possible to give you an adequate answer.
I also hope that you are continuing to follow up with any other options you have. And if there aren't other options at the moment, all you can do is be patient - and try to develop other options.


Is it possible to submit to Nature Toolbox? Recently, I found this list of journals that accept articles describing open-source software. In the list, Nature Toolbox is mentioned. I looked it up and found that it is a category within Nature, but I have not found any information regarding the submission and publication process for this submission type.

Is it really possible to submit an article to Nature Toolbox or is this part commissioned-only?

"Toolbox" is not the name of a journal but of a section of Nature itself. As far as I know, articles published there are comments about existing software. It is  not possible to submit a "toolbox" article from Nature's manuscript tracking system, which most likely means that "toolbox" articles are invite-only.


PhD Applications: Can a good academic record in my master's compensate for a horrible UG academic record? I have a very bad undergraduate academic record -- I failed or didn't attend the end semester exams for many courses (15 courses, to be exact!), and I  had to clear these later on, towards the end of my course.

Admissions to graduate courses in my country (India) are based on entrance examinations (and not your profile or UG record) -- which I've cleared and I'll be going to one of the best universities in my country.

I wish to do a PhD, and I want to keep options in the US or UK open. I intend to study well in my masters and get good scores, and, going by what I've done in the past couple of years, I think I'll be a lot more disciplined in my masters.

My only worry is: will my undergraduate record be a bottleneck no matter how hard I try in my masters? Should I just go into the industry after my masters? I really want to do a PhD!

My overall undergrad GPA is bad (2.72), with, as I've said, 15 "backlogs" (exams that I didn't attend or failed, and cleared later on). However, during the last 3 semesters, I took no backlogs and I averaged above 3. During the final two semesters, I averaged 3.2 and in the final semester I got a 3.4.

In short:

You need to do some research-type work during your Master's to evaluate if your desire to get a Ph.D. has some foundation.

You certainly would have a chance to get into a Ph.D. program with strong enough application. However, you would have to work hard during your Master's.

There are several things you need to consider:

you have not yet finished (or, I guess, even started) your Master's degree. Therefore, you are planning way ahead.
you certainly want to do a research-based Master's degree with a thesis, as opposed to doing a pure course-based Master's. Doing research during your Master's would allow you to understand if you like doing research in the first place. Also, it would strengthen your potential application for a Ph.D.
a carefully written Letter of Intent would be crucial.
sometimes, only a GPA in your last two years of the undergraduate program is used for applicants with a Master's degree.
you should make a decision of industry vs academia closer to the time you are finishing your Master's degree. Moreover, even if you get into industry, nothing prevents you from applying to a Ph.D. program several years later if you still have research interests and, especially, if you position at industry had a research component that you were excited about.


Pure vs Applied maths, and combinatorics, in American universities I'm in my last year of an undergraduate degree in pure maths, doing my thesis on probabilistic combinatorics. In Australia (at least at my university), Hungarian-style combinatorics is classified as "pure".
I'm currently thinking about PhDs and where to apply. One thing that I've noticed is that combinatorics is often classified under "applied maths" (for example, this is the case at MIT).
One important reason I'd consider pursuing a PhD at an American university is for the coursework component -- I'd like to broadly improve my foundational understanding of mathematics, and I like the possibility of changing my area of focus after deeper exposure to different areas of mathematics. However, I have comparatively little interest in applied mathematics coursework (other than combinatorics, of course).
I have a submitted paper in combinatorics, my undergraduate thesis will be in combinatorics, and by far my strongest reference will be from a combinatorialist. Other than my supervisor, my strongest potential references would come from areas that everyone seems to agree are "pure". The higher-level classes in my transcript will also be almost entirely "pure".

For American universities which have both a pure and an applied math program, which one does one typically choose to study combinatorics? Is it flexible? With a cursory search, I wasn't able to find a university quite so explicit about it as MIT.
For universities that classify combinatorics as "applied":

Given my situation, would my application be stronger to pure or applied maths?

Can one do a PhD in pure mathematics with the (tentative) intention for the research component to actually be "applied" (combinatorics)?

Can one do a PhD in applied mathematics but actually take mostly pure coursework?

If you come here for "general advice", I am afraid you'll be disappointed.

You should choose based on the people there. For each school you apply to, look through both the applied and pure departments and see where the mathematicians who work in combinatorics fit in. Most large research universities will list their faculty by research interest, or have dedicated research group webpages. For example, based on this page you probably do not want to apply to Princeton's pure math program.

Note that many schools do not, at least on the graduate admission level, differentiate so strictly about going into applied versus pure mathematics.

(For choosing the school, since you already have research experience, you should look up articles which you find interesting and find out where those authors currently reside.)
It really depends on the school. If a school has no combinatorialist in its pure maths department, and you apply there with an intention of studying combinatorics, your chance of admission is practically 0. Similarly in reverse if all the combinatorics is done in the pure maths department for the school you are applying to.

There is no "one size fits all" solution.
This again depends on the school. Some schools allow it, some schools don't. In many departments it is expected that you find an advisor from within the department and do your dissertation research on a subject that your advisor is interested in and/or an expert on. In other departments more leeway are given to students interested in more interdisciplinary subjects to be jointly advised by two advisors (possibly from different departments with different expertise). But remember, if you are going for a PhD you will need to find an advisor in any case. Shoehorning yourself into a situation where it maybe difficult to find a professor in your own department who is willing to advise you is, in my view, generally not recommended.
This again depends on the individual policies for the schools. Some departments have very strict requirements on what the students must learn for their comprehensive exams; some, not so much. Most schools with graduate programs have very clearly written information on their websites about what is expected in their degree plans. For example, here's Harvard's version for the Applied Maths degree, though it seems they are a little bit short on the exact details.

The only "general advice" I can give is this:

  Don't apply to graduate schools blindly, especially since you have a confirmed research interest. Do your homework and find the experts with whom you would like to study, and apply to study with them. Write to them in advance to confirm that they are interested in taking on students, and possibly solicit advice about other possible individuals if they are not.

A good research school may not be strong in the field of research you want to do. Always, always check before applying.


Can intentionally omitting related work (citations) be considered as misconduct? I've seen a recent journal paper that presents a solution to a problem, and it in the introduction it has a statement that the problem has not been solved yet.
That wouldn’t be very strange if I didn’t publish a paper with a solution a few years ago, which is not cited.

I understand that no one can be aware of all papers published so there can be honest omissions, but these authors were aware of my paper because we talked about it at a conference held before the submission of their paper.

Another case which I have noticed is that some papers avoid mentioning other related papers which present similar methods but perform better than theirs.

Is this considered as misconduct, and is there something one can do about it?

Yes. If they were indeed aware of the fact that a paper exists which proves that the problem was solved, then they clearly commited a scientific misconduct, though less so, I should think, by not citing your paper, and more so by claiming that a problem had no solution which they knew was solved already.
Even if they considered your proof wrong, they should absolutely make it clear why they disagree with you.

However, as commenters have pointed out, there is always a good chance that people don't realise what a paper is about, don't remember that there is that paper, or they wanted to discuss your paper and just forgot about it, which of course doesn't speak for their academic diligence, but means that no misconduct was commited (unless your paper is so high-profile that by not including it, they are neglecting their duty to read the literature before writing a paper.)

Edit: Note that I have answered the general question in your title, not the more precise question in your text, which I don't know how to answer without additional evidence.

Another edit: The formal rules for scientific integrity of my own university, for example, do not explicitly mention omitting a citation, but do (obviously) contain "intentional or grossly negligent misrepresentations in an academically relevant context" (my translaton) as an act of misconduct. This is exactly my point: If they knew, or really should have known, it's academic misconduct. If they didn't know and your paper is so obscure that they didn't act grossly negligent in not finding it, it isn't.


Terminating with Master's after several years in a PhD program. How to indicate on CV/Resume? I am not happy with my PhD program, and after several years I am graduating with a master's this month. I earned the M.S. along the way as a PhD student, but have never formally requested it before this semester. What is the best way to indicate this situation on a CV or resume? I don't want to put just M.S. because then it looks like it took me a really long time to get a master's and I can't put that I am a PhD student because I no longer am.

Right now, I am thinking something like

M.S. in <field>, <University>, May 2016
PhD student in <field>, <University>, Aug. 2011 - May 2016
B.S. in <field>, <Undergrad University>, Aug. 2007 - May 2011

Would that be clear what's going on? Alternatively, should I list PhD above M.S. even though I didn't complete it? Should I list both M.S. and PhD in same line since it is the same university and span of time?

Personally, I would just put the M.S.  People might assume that you were working towards a Ph.D. and decided to leave with a Master's, or they might assume you were working on it part-time; if you think it is important to distinguish, then you can mention it in a cover letter.  But I would guess that, while dropping out of a Ph.D. program might not necessarily look bad, working towards a Ph.D. that you didn't complete isn't something you want to put on your CV.

(Disclaimer: I've never been in a position where I have evaluated people's CV for hiring, so this is just my guess).


What does "to be enjoyed with all rights and privileges pertaining thereto" mean on a French diploma? I have noticed that many French diplomas contain the mention "Pour en jouir avec les droits et prérogatives qui y sont attachés", which can be translated into "[The diploma is conferred upon Mr. X and gives the Y level] to be enjoyed with all rights and privileges pertaining thereto."

What does "to be enjoyed with all rights and privileges pertaining thereto" mean on a French diploma? I.e., what are those rights and privileges? For example, if someone obtained the Baccalaureate diploma, what rights and privileges does that give?

I'm not sure whether it refers to some legal consequences, academic consequences, or something else, so that's why I don't post on Law.SE.

Examples:

That phrase is clearly not France-specific, as @ff524 mentioned. In order to add to and further illustrate the nice answer by @vonbrand, I will share the following paper, which discusses Roman origins and Medieval expressions of the relevant phase(s): http://www.jstor.org/stable/1844716.

In addition to some comments and answers for the above-mentioned most likely duplicate question, I would add that modern practical meaning of this phrase significantly depends on graduate's field of study and institution they graduated from.

In regard to the field of study, rights and privileges might include (beyond the implied rights and privileges to say that one graduated with specific degree from a particular institution, to wear the institution's regalia, to be referred to as a Dr. [for Ph.D. graduates], etc.): to be able to practice in specific regulated fields, such as medicine and law (upon satisfying additional conditions, such as attending medical residency or passing specific state's bar examination, correspondingly).

In regard to the institution, some rights and privileges include to participate in alumni activities, to retain institution's e-mail address, to get discounts on various products and services as well as on attending individual classes and, even, enrolling into certain degree programs at one's alma mater.


Do minors and/or non-major courses affect grad school admissions? Basically what it says in the heading, lengthy explanation below

At my university, just completing your major and general ed courses won't get you enough credits to graduate. This means that we have to either complete a minor (6 courses) or just take courses from other fields. Up until now I have just been taking courses that I thought were interesting, in a variety of fields, none of which have much, if anything, to do with my major (which is psychology).
Minors don't show on the degree certificate - they're technically unofficial and you can only tell by going through the transcript that somebody's completed one. Al

the only two fields available at my university that have any real connection to psych are bio and computer science. The bio curriculum has next to nothing to do with psych though, except two courses which I am taking anyway. Judging from my experience in high school, I have no aptitude and not too much interest in CS. I could get a minor in sociology, which I do enjoying, but I don't plan to pursue social psych later on.

I'm sorry this has been so long. Basically, would it be advisable to minor in something related to psychology in order to boost my chances at grad school? Or is it okay if I finish my psychology requirements and electives and then just take other courses that I find interesting?

I'm an undergraduate, currently in the middle of my second year, so I still have time to finish a minor before I graduate and I'm very confused about everything.

I don't think most schools will know or care about the nuances of the Sahana U minor system.  Ergo, do what you want.

Since many schools don't require a minor at all, they won't worry about if you do the extra classes in history or math or basketweaving.  They will just look to see that you are a psych major, what GPA you have, standardized test scores, essay, letter.

It's extremely unlikely that the content of those 6 diversification courses will affect any decisions.  Just concentrate on doing well with whatever you do.  And take what you like.  The major is already covering key content needed for grad school.


If I wanted to quote a joke from a website in verbatim in a formal academic essay, how would I do that? The assignment is to evaluate humor in movies. I am unsure how to incorporate a joke quote in there. Would it be classified as plagiarism?

Quote: “I have an Epi-Pen. My friend gave it to me as he was dying. It seemed very important to him that I have it.”

If I wanted to quote a joke from a website in verbatim in a formal academic essay, how would I do that?

The same way you use text taken verbatim from any source.


Is it okay to focus the PhD Research Proposal in more than one topic? Some context here: I'm a physics student from Argentina about to get my MSc. I'm applying to a PhD in many universities of Europe and some of them (Oxford and Imperial College London, for example) ask for a Research Proposal.

I find it weird that I must commit to one specific topic before I even know anything about the area (I know some stuff, obviously, but I'd like to learn more before I choose one specific topic). This is different in the US Universities (where I've applied too) where you just apply for the PhD Position and then have one year to take courses and choose your group and research project.

Because of this, I thought that maybe it would be better if I write about two or three possible research topics within the area of the research proposal. Is this okay? To give further information: I want to apply to the Information Theory group of the Physics Department of Oxford and I'd like to write a proposal about Quantum Thermodynamics but also about information theory applications to fermionic systems and out-of-equilibibrium quantum dynamics. This three topics have nothing to do with one another but the group I'm applying to is working on them.

The function of the research proposal depends widely on the nature of the admissions process. If you are being directly hired by and supported by a professor's research group, then the proposal should be directed to the interests of the particular group.

On the other hand, if the department handles admissions and assigns students to groups later on, then you do not need to focus your interests too narrowly. The big question is this: are your interests in the "hot" areas, or other areas within the department? If you're applying in the "hot" area, then you need to be more specific (since there's more competition); if you're doing less popular topics, then you can afford to be less specific.


What is the best way to cite NCBI data for my paper? I'm currently writing my paper, and I have to compare some DNA sequences. But I found some samples have already been analyzed.

So I used analyzed data from NCBI and my own new data (different species) for the comparison.

Now I want to state clearly that I used their data in my paper.
What is the best way to do it?

Should I write their GeneBank accession No. and put the papers in my references?

I'm worried if that is not enough. Should I contact the authors of the paper?

The way to cite NCBI databases, services, and data is described by NCBI itself in an "NCBI Knowledgebase" post here: https://support.nlm.nih.gov/knowledgebase/article/KA-03391/en-us

In addition, NCBI provides a separate file with lots of examples:  ftp://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/education/supportcenter/NCBI_services_citation_examples.txt

Don't guess, look it up !

(Archived permalink: https://web.archive.org/web/20181028213653/https://support.nlm.nih.gov/knowledgebase/article/KA-03391/en-us)


Should former group member be included as a co-author in a follow-up to his work? The field is chemistry. We had a postdoc in our group who made three members of a series of compounds. He collected data, analyzed it, and wrote a paper (several other members of the group were included as co-authors for their contributions to various analyses).

The postdoc then left the group to take up a junior faculty position in another university.

Subsequently other members of the group (including co-authors of the original paper) synthesized further members of the original series, collected data, analyzed it and are in the process of writing another paper.

The topic of discussion is whether the original postdoc should be included as a co-author?

On the one hand, he did not make the samples, analyze them, or directly contribute to the second paper. All of the work happened after he had left the group. But on the other hand, the second paper is very much a follow-up to the original work, and would probably not have been possible without the work he put in on the project.

Should he be recognized in some way (co-authorship? acknowledgement?) or not?

There are three distinct levels of credit that the former postdoc might be given, depending on their level of contribution to each particular new publication.  In order of increasing significance, these are:

Citation.  The postdoc has done significant prior work for these papers, and so clearly this prior work must be cited.
Acknowledgement.  If the postdoc contributed materially to the new paper, but not enough to merit authorship, then acknowledgement is the typical compromise "middle ground."
Authorship (though not in one of the "privileged positions" such as first author or last author, if they are held significant in the particular subfield).

The boundary between citation and acknowledgement is usually pretty straightforward: did the individual make any contribution that significantly aided the new work beyond providing nice, clear explanations of the content of their publications?  If not, then merely citing should be sufficient.

The boundary between acknowledgement and authorship is extremely field dependent, and moreover often affected strongly by the subfield.  With ethical and trusted colleagues, the best way to navigate this question is often simply to have an open discussion together about where and how to draw this boundary.


Etiquette for effective workshop comments After a few years of graduate school, I've noticed that I may not be asking questions and making criticism in the workshops in the best way. By "best," I have two goals for comments. The first (selfish) goal is to develop a reputation for being a intelligent, insightful colleague with good comments. The second goal is to effectively communicate my concerns to help others improve their research. Luckily these goals are mutually reinforcing.

Observing others in my department's weekly workshop, the questions that usually get the most attention are those that are phrased quite strongly, even aggressively.

My tendency has always been to be polite and not try to put someone on the spot about their work. I gently communicate the problems I see with the work. As a result, presenters often do not listen. They brush off the questions as if they are unthreatening and thereof of limited concern.

I do not want workshops to be a threatening or aggressive environment, but it seems like only questions that get the presenter's adrenaline flowing regularly warrant proper consideration and response. Maybe I'm going too soft and I can find a middle ground without being one of the aggressive (sometimes rude) ones.

I am not sure that your questions at a conference are necessarily a major concern. If you look at how science is propagated, conferences are typically a step before publication. Therefore, it is noble of you to think of it as a point where you can provide constructive comments to authors about their work. However, the most critical point comes when work is published and peer-reviewed.

Based on your experience at conferences (which I to some extent share) you can ask yourself the following: Is the author/presenter interested in your comments. If he/she is, then it would be counter productive to ignore your questions. The question-and-answer format, on the other hand, is too brief and fragmented considering the time constraints of a presentation schedule to be the forum for constructive criticism. That is probably also why the more aggressive questions dominate. In the end, there is nothing wrong with approaching a person during a break to initiate a deeper discussion. you will then also get a better feeling if your comments are welcome.

A final thought. I tend to think as the saying: it is sometimes better to be silent and seem a fool than to speak and prove it. You can exchange "fool" by whatever trait you wish.


Can we submit our research paper for review at two IEEE conferences simultaneously? Can we send our research paper to two IEEE conference simultaneously, and then after acceptance, decide which conference proceedings to publish it in?

No.

It is considered unethical in the academic community to submit a paper for simultaneous review at multiple venues (unless it is explicitly permitted by the publications, and you disclose this on submission).

The IEEE guidelines on multiple submission prohibit multiple simultaneous submissions:

  Authors should only submit original work that has neither appeared elsewhere for publication, nor which was under review for another refereed publication.

The guidelines further specify that failure to disclose, on submission, that the work is under review for another publication, can result in (after multiple offenses)

  suspension of publication privileges in all IEEE Publications for 1 year and rejection and return of all papers by the author(s) that are currently in review or in any IEEE publication's queue (papers may be re-submitted after suspension term has expired).

In addition, engaging in this practice can irreparably damage your reputation in the academic community.


My students are planning on taking an exam together via Zoom I am a college instructor at a university in the United States. I am giving an exam to my students in a few days, and I am aware that some of them are having conversations about making a Zoom meeting to take the exam together. I take cheating seriously, trying to both dissuade and catch. Nevertheless, if I end up having access to this Zoom meeting, I am not quite sure about what I should do. The exam can be submitted any time during a 24h period, and it is not proctored. I am aware that those conditions could be different, but they are not going to change for this exam.

If I decide not to do anything, I am giving unfair advantage to students not following the academic integrity policy at the school. There is a chance I could present a strong case for the cheating if they are not careful and their answers look identical, but that's not guaranteed.

If I decided to join the meeting using my real Zoom/email address, my guess is that they would get scared right away and leave. If I want to get any information in this scenario, I would have to capture my screen to see who was connected to that meeting. Even if they are using their real names, I would just have a list of the students who were on the call at that moment, and would have zero evidence of what they were talking about.

If I wanted to avoid that, I would have to use a fake Zoom account, which already feels like not the right thing to do. That might give me the chance to stay on the call, and see evidence that it is being used for cheating. But this evidence would just be for me unless I capture my screen/audio, which seems like another thing that might not be right to do.

I am sending them a letter offering my views on academic integrity, in the dissuasion front, but I don't think that would dissuade the proponents of this Zoom call.
What do you think would be the best course of action?

I've spent some time thinking about the problem.
Disclaimer: I believe exams are a way to push students to learn something from the course, grades being an incentive. The solution below may be very unorthodox, so brace yourselves. It's also based on my experiences at an European university, where an instructor has a lot of power in defining an exam and grading it.
I see two ways the Zoom meeting can work:

They solve exams individually, then meet-up for a review session, correct the exams and send them. Which is a good strategy. They will mostly work on the exams alone and during the review session they will gain additional knowledge.
They meet up just after the exams are given and spend time solving them together. It's a bad strategy. Brain storm sessions are usually ineffective, some of the students won't be pulling their weight and, I guess, in the end they will have to spend more time on the exam to turn in the same quality answers as working alone.

That being said, recognising your own weaknesses and turning to someone for help is also a very important skill in life, so I wouldn't mitigate it. I also like very much Buffy's idea to make them cite the sources.
So this is what I'd do:

I'd ask them to cite the sources. When working individually, the sources should differ. If they work together it will be a lot of trouble to not only change the answers, but also the sources.
I'd allow them, however, to work together and ask them to send a contribution report. I'd expect that it would encourage them to divide the workload more equally.
I'd set a different grading standard for individual vs. collaboration work. E.g. the points you lose on a mistake is weighted by a number of people that work on the exam.
I'd allow them to mark one reviewer (whose help doesn't affect a score) and their contribution. I'd encourage the reviewers to also report on their reviews. If the contribution was helpful, it would improve the score of the reviewer. If possible I'd also make myself available as an reviewer.

I believe these solution would change possible ways to cheat into available strategies, making the exam also an interesting experience of collaborative work.


Should one take a 2:1 Bsc or a 2:2 MSci? I know someone doing an MSci in Computer Science—an MSci being an integrated (undergraduate) Master's degree, so equivalent in the UK to an MSc—and as such achieved all the credits required for a BSc but did not graduate last year. All the way through this year, they have had the option to drop out of the MSci course and graduate with their BSc qualification, which they got a 2:1 in.

Note: I am referring to the UK system: in this case, a 2:1 refers to upper second-class honours and 2:2 refers to lower second-class honours.

Now, with less than two weeks to go, they are concerned about their exams and dissertation and so on, and are worried that they will get a 2:2 at the Master's level. As a result, they are considering dropping out last minute and just taking the BSc 2:1.

Now I am advising against this, as for one thing it just makes this whole last year a waste of time and I reckon they're quite solidly in the 2:1 bracket for MSci anyway, but I also think that a 2:2 Master's is still considered better than a 2:1 BSc.

I'm also thinking that within 5 years or so of industry work (this person has already secured a long-term position based on an internship) the degree, and much less the classification, become less significant compared with the person's industry record. In 5 years time, I expect a future employer to be looking at the employment and project record and possibly be interested the degree achieved, but not the degree classification, in which case an MSci is better than a BSc. This is just anecdotal though, I am by no means an expert on how people look at CVs in later stages of employment in industry.

So I already have quite a clear opinion on this, but I'd like to hear what professionals think about it. Thinking objectively, which is likely to be better: a 2:1 BSc in Computer Science, or a 2:2 MSci in Computer Science?

It really does depend on what the short- and long-term career objectives are. If someone really has no desire to continue on to a PhD, then it probably doesn't make too much of a difference—they're being hired based on what they can do with the master's, rather than the grade, and only a handful of employers will care about the difference between a 2:1 and 2:2.

On the other hand, if at some point, someone wants to go back to graduate school for further training, a 2:2 master's may not be the most useful credential to have on one's record.


Second Masters in maths after master's in physics: how does it help getting into PhD in Europe? How does it help doing a second master's in mathematics after doing first master's in Physics for getting a PhD in theoretical Physics in Europe?

Will it be helpful to compensate for a low GPA in Masters in Physics?

Does the reputation of the university (master's degree) really matters for the PhD admissions if one has got enough project experiences in the field from top institutions?

Nothing compensates your low GPA in Physics. I think you have to learn to live with that. But there are several ways to improve your competency for the PhD application in theoretical physics. First let me share my experience with the application procedure in Europe.

In France, from my experience, there is a well structured process for PhD intake. Your application will undergo an initial screening using various criteria, one among them is the GPA, other is the masters thesis. Next step is the interview(expect several rounds). I had a completely different experience in Germany. I was offered a project associate position for 6 months as an entrance to the PhD, predominantly on the basis of my current work(master thesis) and the recommendation from my adviser. I know several others who had similar experience. I recommend you the following.

Find a shot term internship in the field of your liking. If you do really well such that you may get a publication or at least if the supervisor could give a good recommendation for your application, then you have good chances of getting admitted.
Have you considered the US? A great deal of research is going on there. Appear for GRE if your GPA meets the minimum requirements. I cannot say for sure a good GRE score alone can get you a position, guess someone from US could say more about that.
If the above options seem impractical, try applying for a MS in theoretical physics. There are some specialized MS offerings like astrophysics, photonics etc.
Do an independent research in the field of your taste. There is always a possibility for collaboration with others in the field if you could convince them you have the potential to be a researcher.

Bottom line

IMO, doing a masters in mathematics for the sole purpose to be a potential candidate for PhD in theoretical physics because you think you can't be one due to your low GPA is not a good idea. There are other options to consider. If you are really motivated to do math, nothing stops you.


Term for reverse lookup of concepts Suppose I have envisioned a concept that I am fairly certain has been explored before. I can describe its nature and its characteristics, but I do not know the formal name of the concept, nor its history and prior development. My objective is to formalize my research by identifying the concept’s formal name and basing my research on its preexisting foundations. (My research may or may not elaborate/extend the current state of research; it could simply be a search for an existing concept I want to investigate). What would be the name (ie. the definiendum) of the process of finding both an existing concept and porting your notions of that concept onto the formalisms previously established for that concept?

Up to now, I have been informally using the terms rebasing and porting, as in

  rebasing/porting my own informal understanding of the concept onto its formal foundations

If no such word exists for what I’ve described, I do offer rebasing and porting as self-descriptive definiendums.

Perhaps the first part of my definition, i.e., finding an existing concept, can be considered optional as it is well-described by reverse lookup; however, the latter part is key.

To make it more clear what it is I am after, here is an example: Alice is studying networks, and exploring how to permit communication between any two nodes using the fewest connections possible. As she develops this concept, she suspects it might have already been fleshed out in academia, so she searches for the name of the concept and finds spanning trees. Now that she knows what it is she has conceived, she can explore the concept further. She can also translate (port, “rebase”, etc) her personal, informal language, notations, conventions, and concepts onto their corresponding formal equivalents previously established in academia. What is the name of the translation/porting/rebasing/etc process described in italics in the previous sentence?

I'm not sure that any such specialized term exists, or at least I have never heard of such.  The process, however, is quite familiar to me.  I find it most interesting when I discover that several different subjects have all approached the same topic from different directions, each typically having invented its own largely unrelated terminology.

As for what to call it? I would typically refer to it simply as searching for related work and then connecting my work to the prior results.  It might be a fun target for a neologism, though!


Am I too old to do an MS in Finance? I want to do a Masters in Finance. I am from India. I am 30 years old. I have seen that most people in masters programs in finance are less than 25 year old. I also don't have much in terms of corporate work experience. I have degrees in engineering and a 2 year diploma in management with a specialization in Finance. From what I know, masters programs in finance in the American and European business schools are mostly meant for those fresh out of an undergraduate degree. I feel that if I finish an MS in Finance I will be competing with people much younger than me for entry level jobs and therefore will be at a disadvantage.

The general answer for all such questions is no, you aren't too old. Even if you were 60.

Actually, masters programs are meant for qualified candidates, not for some age group. The fact that most people continue through schooling without breaks explains the age distribution in graduate degrees, not some hidden rules and not market forces.

Your admissibility will depend on your past record and how well it fits entrance requirements. After that, your success depends on you.

Nor do I believe that you will suffer age discrimination entering the workforce for such a small difference in ages. Laws may govern this in some places. But, again, you will be viewed in the marketplace by your accomplishments, not your age.

There are exceptions, of course, since not everyone is reasonable or just, but enough people do the right thing that you should be fine.


How to ensure committee reads and comments on dissertation draft prior to final examination? The constructive question is, What practices/strategies could help ensure the committee reads the dissertation?

I am wondering if those who already hold a PhD, or advanced graduate students finishing their dissertations have experience where they suspected that their committee (besides their Chair) have not read their dissertation prior to the final defense examination. I would guess this issue is far from unique, as there is a variety of reasons for this. Here are some general reasons:

Gap in Access: Committee members become separated from the department/institution, either completely or to some significant extent. Examples include retirements, where the individual might remain tangentially involved in a part time or 'emeritus' role; leaving for another job at a different institution, etc. (both are often associated with geographic relocation).

This creates additional distance between the student and that individual, making an "office drop-in" unfeasible and communication more lopsided, as the individual may feel less press to respond to emails/calls.

Note: difficulties with communication can be a standalone category, but I thought it was too broad as it applies across the board.

Gap in Motivation: This is essentially a gap between committee member's current priorities/interests and the thesis. Committee members, who have been added to the thesis committee because their area of expertise complements the knowledge capital on the committee, might feel disinterested from the particular dissertation topic selected by the student. Because the topic does not directly tie into their work, there is little incentive for them to spend time carefully reviewing the dissertation.
Lack of time/low priority: Related to the previous reasons, although this  issue might surface even if the faculty member is reasonably accessible (on campus etc.) and reasonably interested in the thesis. Despite their 'well meaning' and 'best intentions', the thesis nevertheless keeps slipping to the bottom of their to-do's and they don't get around to reading/commenting for months. The pattern may recur despite regular polite reminders by email from the student and/or the committee chair.

Whatever the underlying reason (or their combinations), the result is the same: the thesis does not receive as thorough review as it technically should. The obvious negative consequences may be summarized as:

lower overall quality of the thesis (more eyes on the writing helps
spot all sorts of issues that may be visible only from the unique
vantage points of highly competent readers);
lower quality of the student's learning experience (less feedback = less learning);
longer time to complete thesis (since the student has to compensate for lack of feedback by trying to work out all the kinks on his/her own, plus the time it takes to simply wait for committee members to respond to requests for feedback).
difficulties during the final examination (thesis defense), since lack of committee's familiarity with the content of the thesis directly impacts their ability to be more "plugged in" to the examination presentation and 'grilling' of the candidate. As a result the candidate might have incorrect assumptions/expectations of the committee's knowledge of what he/she is talking about, and the resulting general confusion (can anyone relate to that one? ;)

What to do. How to reduce the chances of the 'neglected thesis syndrome'?

This is a real problem in practice. Basically everyone I know (and this, at times, includes me -- though I make it a point to set aside sufficient time to mark it up throughout and return the comments to the student) reads theses the day before the defense, with all of the consequences you mention. I have had more than one case where a student thought that receiving no comments meant that everyone was ok with the content of the thesis, just to find out that the defense did not go well and the committee wanted to have substantial additional work before they will approve the thesis. Not good.

I think the most common cause is that committee members simply don't have the time. To read and mark up a 150 page thesis thoroughly takes well over a day of full time work. To a committee member, this is unproductive work -- no publications will come of it, no grant funding, very little appreciation by the department. So it slips to the bottom of the todo list until it can't be pushed off any more (the day before the defense).

The second most important cause is that theses never get finished on time. I have received theses from candidates the day before the defense -- that's definitely not enough time and the candidates should have known better. I now ask that they at least send me the draft they have two weeks before the defense, but not always are they in a form that makes it worth reading through.

In the end, there is probably little you can do to affect the underlying problem, which is that committee members have little motivation to give a candidate good feedback. Your best bet is to keep them up to date with regard to what you do: make an appointment to go see them every 6 months and tell them what you have been doing; if you have drafts of individual chapters, send it to your committee members as soon as you have it; invite them to seminar talks you give; etc. Build a relationship. If a committee member is interested and feels engaged, you're more likely to get good feedback at a time when it's useful.

On the other hand, if the only time when you see your committee members is (i) when you enlist them to your committee, (ii) for your proposal defense, (iii) for your final defense, and if you give them the draft of your thesis 3 days before the defense, then don't be surprised if you get negative comments during the defense or in reply to your thesis.


How to prepare for first year university after college diploma? This will be my first year attending university after obtaining an advanced diploma from a local college. I will be going into first year Computer Science in September and graduated this year with a diploma for Computer Systems Technology.

I am concerned about the first year courses however. First year Computer Science requires Chemistry 1, Algebra 1, Calculus 1, Discrete Mathematics 1 as well as the comp sci courses. It's been 3 years since I've had to do any higher level math and chemistry and I'm not sure how I'll adapt to the different learning style and intensity of university.

How can I prepare myself for these courses and university over the summer?

It would be a good idea to Contact the professors of the courses.  Usually they are already assigned to the course before it is offered and something you can look up prior to the course starting.  They could give you a list of recommended reading/sites to visit or they may simply say you have nothing to worry about.

I too have switched between community colleges, public and private universities and I do understand your worry.  While the experience is subject to change based on the individual, I found there to be little I needed to do to change my study habits and achieve the desired grades between all 3 experiences.

Remember it is school where you LEARN.  You aren't expected to go in already being a calculus expert or a mad scientist.  These are the freshman/sophomore level courses where it is generally assumed little prior knowledge outside of the pre-req basics.  Of course some classes also go hard early to weed out students as well and force drop out.

The only other suggestion outside of contacting the school/teacher for materials
 is seeing if you have the text book for the classes listed already.  From my days in college, usually the online forum for the class had a home page that listed off basic syllabus info such as teacher name and course materials needed.
 If not you can always contact the school/call the uni book store to find out what the names of the books are for those specific classes.  You will generally be able to find text books on Amazon and will be significantly cheaper than the uni book store anyways.  Thumb through the chapters on your own leisure.  That way you can go through the book and write notes down on things that seem to be a struggle topic and do your own focused preparation.  Or you may go through all the books and see that you really were worrying for nothing!


Should Professors and by extension their TA's, hold student athletes to the same standard? As a former student athlete at the high school level who played football, the academic requirements asked of me were no different than that of my fellow classmates. I never asked for any special treatment and I rarely if ever discussed my athletic activities with my teachers. I would also suspect that if I had asked, no special consideration would have been given. I had to make decisions that affected my academics as well as limited my ability to pursue other extracurricular activities.

In college, I focused on research, work experience, and academics.

Now that I am in the process of applying to graduate schools where I presume I will be a TA.

How should I approach the situation?
Would I hold student athletes to the same standards in terms of deadlines and grading, or should I take into consideration the added-value and extraordinary circumstances that student athletes face at a university setting?
If I am asked to give special considerations, would I have the right to refuse such requests or would it be strictly the decision of the instructor?
If I am asked to overlook the actions of a student, whether suspected or flagrant, is 'rocking the boat' an action considered worth pursuing given the cost in terms of time and attention?
As an undergraduate, my professors had a 'catch-all' offering a case-by-case review of such requests but without explicit determinations, would this be the best course of action as a TA?

I approach the question namely to conceptualize different scenarios in case I find myself in similar waters, balancing the time and effort cost of pursuing such a case as a TA with the responsibilities as a graduate student completing my degree.

The following is specific to my university, the University of Michigan, but I would guess that the situation is similar at many other universities.

As far as I know, I am not allowed to apply different grading standards to different students in the same class, except that, if a class has both graduate and undergraduate students, then the graduate students may be held to a higher standard. (I've never used different standards for grad and undergrad students, but I believe it is permitted.)

Despite the general rule, there are oft-repeated stories about a particular professor (not in my department but in my college) who allegedly applied easier grading standards to athletes, over a decades-long career, and apparently got away with it. I don't know whether a tenured faculty member could get away with it nowadays, but I certainly wouldn't advise a TA to try it.

Apart from grading, though, athletes in major sports have one advantage, which may compensate for the time demands of their sports. The athletic department provides tutoring for student-athletes and tries to keep an eye on their academic progress (partly so that they don't become academically ineligible to play, partly to keep up a respectable graduation rate, and partly for the genuine benefit of the students).  I once had two varsity hockey players in my class, and an assistant coach phoned me (this was long before email) to check on their progress and to ask me to let him know if they had difficulties in my class.


PhD Program with a bad GPA I am a student from Poland. I am bachelor in Economics and Logistics and now I am doing my Masters from Econometrics. I have quite good achievements (1-year scholarship in Japan, ambassador program for a big NGO, few wins or good places in the contests etc). I am also waiting for publishing my first research paper and plan to do 2 more untill I will graduate.

There is one problem though. My GPA is not very good. It's a combination of 3 varriables. First, on the beggining of my studies I planned to go to bussiness rather then academic work. Second I have a mild/average form of brittle bone disease which result of having to take 3 years of medical leave (not at once). And sometimes in cases when the injury was not to bad (for example 2-3 months) i tried to make up the classes and I left deciding that i rather not lose another year and pass on B- or C then to go the other way. Third factor is the fact that going from economics to very math-based field as statistics and econometrics is not easy. I am managing this but with having to make up the material from bachelor's in this field it's rather B on average then straight A.

I love to do the research, and to analise data. My papers and articles are usually recieved as really good. And I would love to be able to get to one of top 100 Universities for a PhD program. Is there a chance if I would have a good Master's thesis, nice GRE/TOELF score and 3 academic papers?

I would be gratefull for all the answers :)

I am not in your field, though I have been a faculty member in several PhD programs in the social and health sciences. So, I'm not sure how much of this would be relatable. However, PhD programs typically have a minimal GPA requirement. You do not mention what your GPA is exactly, but typically programs don't require an A (4.0) average. If the application requires a cover letter or personal statement, you can explain challenges you have had in the past, though you should make sure that you describe how these challenges would not impede on your future success. Also, you mention a good TOEFL score, though I would suggest working on your writing in English or have a native English speaker proofread your materials, if you are applying to US programs.


Putting some upcoming positions in CV I am going to apply for a Postdoc position which starts six month later. I am a postdoc in institute A and have new grant in institute B to start in upcoming month. Can I put this position and grant in my CV? Since I have not started that yet.

If the contract for the grant is finalized, you can list it as an achievement on your CV.


Colleague erroneously got a grade that is too high I know that for a certain project a colleague with whom I have worked on the project erroneously got a grade that is higher than he should have gotten (the administration made a mistake is my guess). He told me about this himself, but also told me that he is not planning on changing it. The course is a 12 ects course, so has quite an impact on someone's gpa.

Now I have two thoughts:

It is not fair to 'betray' a colleague who trusted me with this story
I also worked on this project and I got the correct grade, it feels unfair. And I also simply feel that it is simply not just in a way.

What do you think? And should I take action or not?

Answering from an ethical perspective. The grade was entered in error, if the other student was unaware of a mistake they would have been morally fine, it is not their job to double check the grader's work.

But since they are aware of the mistake it is their obligation to inform the grader. By intentionally keeping that information from the grader they are deliberately breaking ethical rules. In addition, by telling you about it they are compounding the original wrong by making you a party to their original transgression.

Unfortunately your classmate has made you responsible for their behavior because now you have to choose between doing the right thing (reporting them since they will not step forward) or being silent.

I can't tell you the consequences of that choice, but possible consequences of turning them in are social rejection and possible consequences of staying silent include academic sanctions against you if it comes out that you knew and did nothing. Just remember, they chose to put you in this mess, and for that you owe them nothing.


Past experience seems to be overlooked by future employer in recruitment process: Is that a bad sign? I have been involved in the recruitment process for a researcher position in Europe and I have been informed I was accepted.
However, thinking about how the interview went, I noticed that most of it focused on the evaluation of the skills and the responsibilities associated with the future job opportunity. In particular, I was expecting the prospective employer to at least show some interest in my previous work (my recently-completed PhD* for example), beyond the common question of introducing myself. However, no questions have been explictly asked about it, which I found particularly odd, since both topics (PhD and new position) are closely-related.
Is the employer's lack of interactivity/interest in knowing more about a candidate's past experiences normal/common in such interviews or is it a bad sign?

*I don't know if this is relevant, but a PhD wasn't mentioned in the requirements for the position, but I applied anyway.

First, learn to take good news as good news! You've got better things to do in life than to second-guess these things :-)
As for the actual question: We really can't know. In academia, a lot of things are available in written form. You probably had to provide letters of reference, and the people who interviewed you will have read them. You also wrote a PhD thesis, and the people who interviewed you will have taken a look at it. You may have written publications, and the people who interviewed you will be aware of them. So a lot of your past performance is an open book. What isn't available to the selection committee is your ideas about your future because, I assume, you don't have a website on which you have provided a vision statement.
So, first, it doesn't strike me as particularly odd that the people who want to hire you for a particular job ask you about that job rather than your previous job. Second, just take the fact that they're offering you the job as good news and celebrate!


How to credit a photo taken by someone else in my publication? How do authors normally address a photo courtesy?
I have a photo taken by Dr. X, I would like to use it in my paper which is planned to be submitted to an engineering journal. How should I respect the photo credit?
is it okay to write  this in the figure caption, like:

\caption{blah blah  .... (photo courtesy of Dr. X).}

should I even mention the title Dr?

Credit lines for photographs should be displayed conspicuously with the photo or in a footnote on the same page. In general, it should look something like: "© Ansel Adams 2015" or "© 2015 Ansel Adams". Alternatively, if the photo was given to you for general use, use something like: "photo courtesy of Ansel Adams".

Some guidelines for citing images in various formats are posted here: University of Cincinnati. Near the bottom of that website there is a short section with advice on photo credit lines.


How to find less-competitive faculty positions in the US universities? I plan to move to the US, and thus, looking for a less-competitive faculty position to start there. Later, I can find better jobs, but at this stage, I just need to find a position.

For an outsider, all the job ads are similar. How can I find which job is less-competitive.

As an example, is it really less-competitive to apply for a faculty position in Alaska or less-interesting states (due to geographical reasons, I do not know which).

NOTE: This is the additional question separated from my previous question, as advised by a moderator.

Although (see my comments), I cannot recommend this sort of career path, here are two ways for an outsider to determine which positions will be less competitive:

Teaching load and pay. If the pay is poor, and the teaching load is high (say, 4/4 or higher), then the position will be less competitive.
Look up the average SAT scores (easy to find via Google) of American schools to which you are applying. This is a reasonable (although not perfect) guide for the quality of the undergraduates that these schools enroll. Schools with lower averages will have less competition for faculty positions.

That said, all faculty jobs are highly competitive.


Can a postdoc conduct collaborative research with people that are not their PI? I am a junior faculty member at a research university. I am working with postdoc A  on a project. Postdoc A's PI, Dr. B, works in the same university, but is affiliated with another department. Prior to starting the project, postdoc A and I have agreed that we would work on the project during their spare time. We did not inform Dr. B about this arrangement. When the project is about half-way done, Dr.B found out that A is working with me on the project. Dr.B approached me and told me that all postdoc A's projects have to go through them, and claimed that postdoc A could get fired by the school if the school found out that postdoc A is publishing papers without their PI.

My questions:

Is it true that all projects of a postdoc have to go through their PI (even if the research is conducted during the postdoc's spare time)?
Do I have the obligation to let Dr.B know about my collaboration with postdoc A, given that we agree to work on the project during A's spare time? (I know as a courtesy to a colleague, I probably should have informed Dr.B about it before the project starts...)
What can I do at this point to make sure postdoc A's career is not affected by this incident?

It is likely not legally binding that postdoctoral activity must go through the supervisor, especially not if the additional work was beyond "normal working hours" and uncompensated. For example, if the postdoc had wished to donate time to a charity, no permission from the supervisor would be necessary. However,
Yes, you and Postdoc A had a professional obligation to inform Dr. B about your collaboration, especially if it was intended to result in publication and was not just for Postdoc A to learn something new. Dr. B has committed to training and advising Postdoc A, and Dr. B's financial and intellectual commitment to Postdoc A makes your unpaid collaboration possible. Also, you might be hard-pressed now (after the fact) to demonstrate convincingly that none of the work ever took time from the projects with Dr. B. Therefore,
You should take the fall for this one. Apologize to Dr. B, say that you should have known better and that you wrongly advised Postdoc A. Offer review and editing of the manuscript and possibly minor authorship to Dr. B. Or, collaboration on a follow-up project. Give a gift of coffee, tea, or a favorite food (I have found this to be a surprisingly effective apology strategy with academics -- citing my personal experience here).

Citation for all advice -- personal experience in the lab of another Dr. B, watching another Postdoc A.


Should I include name of potential advisor on my statement of purpose (SOP) I am currently writing my statement of purpose (SOP) for top graduate schools in engineering majors in US. I am wondering should I include name of my potential advisor on my SOP (Is it a good idea to do that)? The problem is I am thinking if I do not include name of advisor it might be the sign I did not look at his/her research page and I am not very specific about my plan. On the other side, if I include name of potential advisor and my application is not competitive or he/she is not accepting any graduate student this might cause others not to look at my application since they might think I am not interested in their research.

Faculty at a top-10 school in aerospace engineering gave a former student of mine the advice of indicating several professors whose research he was interested in, for exactly the reasons you suggest: by showing too narrow a scope, it makes it harder for other researchers to gain interest, and by just submitting a "generic" SOP, you run the risk of looking like you're not doing your homework. Showing an interest in several faculty makes it easier for someone to advocate for you in the admissions committee.


Undergraduate seeking advice about future career and working relationship with PI I am currently a second year undergraduate student at a public university in the US working in a lab run by a successful new PI who is on tenure track and is currently in their 3rd year at this university. I started working in this lab my first month of undergraduate, and have continued working ever since.

I am uncertain of whether or not I am cut out for research and feel like my time and skills are being taken advantage of. I was also wondering if I should continue to work here.

I'll briefly outline some examples below to make the situation clearer:

As a freshman, I was uncertain about course selection and I asked my PI for advice where I was told to take Class B over Class A. In hindsight, by taking Class A, I could have saved a year but now have to stay one more to get my degree.
I have been working a lot during the semester, between 40-80 hours/week. I spend the time on my own volition because I enjoy the work I do and learn a lot while keeping up with my coursework. However, my PI expresses disappointment when I don't keep up the same time commitment during weeks with midterms for instance, and I feel guilty that I can't do as much.
One stipulation that my PI gave me was that if I work for the lab for 2 summers, I would be given a recommendation and be able to do research with my PI's old advisor during the summer instead of a traditional REU or internship. My PI's postdoc advisor is very well known in the field and is also at a prestigious institution. I am unsure about the best way to ask for compensation during breaks such as summer for instance, and I am not being fully compensated compared to traditional REU students due to "lack of funding" or "investments already being made" in my research.
I have expressed doing REU's or internships instead of staying at my institution doing research with my PI, but when I ask for a recommendation letter the topic quickly changes, or my PI asks me to write it myself. To my surprise, my PI writes recommendation letters for other undergraduates in the lab applying to graduate school.
For the past year I was working on a project in which I was able to give a talk and two poster presentations at 2 large international society meetings. Ultimately, I was placed on another project and my old one was left to be determined and I'm left wondering where these projects would go. My PI has 2 PhD students, but they are also in their 3rd year and have not published at all yet. I am also wondering if I have to wait for them first before I can send my material off for publication.

I am conflicted at this point since I enjoy my research and it is in the field I would like to do my graduate studies in. I would like to have some compensation to cover at least housing or otherwise do an REU instead, however, most REU deadlines have passed. For clarification, I want a strong recommendation for wherever I apply, but it seems like it has to be on my PI's terms, in that I am being strongly pushed into working here instead of somewhere else.

Your question could be edited to be more concise (it reads a little bit like a rant at the moment), but here are some responses to your points:

"I asked my PI for advice where I was told to take Class B over Class A" - You asked your PI for advice, and he gave you his/her advice. It is your fault for not making sure that the course doesn't cause problems for your schedule. Your institution likely has some sort of "academic advising" service for these types of degree scheduling things, and your PI likely does not know all of the intricacies of your undergraduate program. This is a learning experience for you, but it's important to remember that it's up to you to take charge of your education.
"I have been working a lot during the semester, between 40-80 hours/week." - I'm not sure how you're working 40-80 hours a week while still completing all of your undergraduate courses. Can you maybe clarify this? But that much time seems fairly high for an undergraduate student with a full course load.
"I am not being fully compensated due to "lack of funding" or "investments already being made" in my research" - This is up to your judgement. There are some professors who will take advantage of undergraduate students (many are not paid at all), but there is also very likely limited money budgeted for undergraduate students. It's impossible for us to tell what's going on, but it's up to you to decide if it's worth it, and if you should maybe try to become involved in a different lab at your institution.
"when I ask for a recommendation letter the topic quickly changes, or my PI asks me to write it myself. To my surprise, my PI writes recommendation letters for other undergraduates in the lab applying to graduate school." - Many professors will have the student write a letter of reference, even for students applying for grad school, so this is not unusual. That being said, reference letters for grad school are arguably more important than letters for summer positions, so it would make sense that he/she would put more effort into a grad school letter. But even if you write the letter, your PI should still be editing it and making it their own.
"Ultimately, I was placed on another project and my old one was left to be determined." - It's not uncommon for projects to be put aside while there are other more important projects on the go, and it's possible the PI's current funding does not cover those projects. Again, we don't know the situation, so maybe you should try discussing this more with your PI, and ask more specific questions about what kind of data he wants and what it would take to finish them.
"Ultimately, I want a strong recommendation for wherever I apply, but it seems like it has to be on my PI's terms, and I feel stuck." - I don't really understand why you feel stuck and why it's on your PI's terms. It sounds like you've already gained a lot of experience presenting your work, and that will help make a recommendation letter strong, especially for a second year undergraduate student. Now if he is refusing to write you a letter because he wants you to work in his lab, that's a different story. And by writing you a reference letter, that includes you writing it, and him/her editing it.


Identifying new references when appending to existing reference list I am building a database from several online sources like Engineering Village. Everyday I am searching different/close/related keywords that pertains to my research topic. Then, I am (everyday) exporting and printing out the documents to do manual filtering depending on the relevance of the article/report. I also importing/appending daily search results into my cumulative list. This may lead to duplication which Reference Managers identifies and filters out in most cases. How do I have a daily reference list such that there is no duplicates? In order words, is there a way to know each time I append my references which are the new ones that I generated (through query) only today.

Please let me know if you need any clarifications. Thank you for your help.

If you are using the EndNote reference manager, it will tell you that you are importing duplicates, which references are duplicates, and then give you options for what you can do with them. It seems reasonable that other reference managers will do the same.

As an example, many journals now have adopted the practice of publishing articles online before they have been assigned to a print volume. Thus, I may want the manager to replace the old reference (without page and volume information) with the new (with that information). EndNote lets me choose to do this.


What effect does a good research paper have on a university's reputation and worldwide ranking? What effect does a good research paper have on a university's worldwide rankings?

None. One good paper makes its author(s) look good, but does not make the university more or less remarkable (either in term of perception by the research community or rankings). It takes a lot of good output (papers, conferences, etc.) for people to start saying “hey, that university has great research done in so many research groups, it looks like a great place”, and for whatever rankings to be affected.

Unless by “good” you mean “outstanding”, not in the academic sense “quite okay but I’m writing in hyperbolic style” but in the meaning of “exceptionally good; clearly noticeable”. One groundbreaking (Nobel level, if you wish) discovery made at a single institution will help it.


Tips on organising the survey of a large body of literature For a paper I am currently writing, I am doing an extensive literature review on a subject which is much more vast than I had anticipated. Are there any specific tricks and tips for organizing ones reading when the body of literature is so large? I tend to get carried away with interesting references and lose the overview a little. If I read everything linearly from A-Z, I would not have the time to finish my review. My goal is thus instead to have a non-exhaustive, but ideally representative impression of the structure of the literature (that is, different strands of research, who 'responded' to whom, etc.).

I would very much appreciate any hints from an experienced academic.

If my opinion, a good survey is not a snapshot of what is out there in the literature, but rather is a presentation of the current state of knowledge on a subject (which will necessarily involve some snapshots of what is out there).  This model of knowledge is the novel contribution of the survey.  Your goal, then, is to develop enough expertise in the "lay of the land" to be able to see a pattern that may have never been explicitly enunciated in the literature before.

As such, I recommend the following iterative approach, which has been useful for me in preparing surveys:

Begin with a hypothesis of the structure of knowledge on your topic.
With keyword searching, find lots of articles related to the topic.
Do not read the articles: read just enough to make sure they are actually relevant, and download and organize them into categories based on your hypothesis.
When you've got a big enough pile, skim them to see how your hypothesis is holding up, and adjust it to fit the reality of what you've found.
Repeat from 2, with your adjusted hypothesis, gathering more references, until you find your hypothesis is beginning to stabilize.  Once you've got a stable hypothesis, you are ready to write, and your final organization will reflect the discovery enunciated in your final hypothesis.

A good survey is probably going to be in the 50 - 200 reference range.  If you are finding that you are gathering many more than that, consider whether your subject is too broad and you need to narrow its focus.  It may also be that you have an appropriate focus, but that you are thinking about too many details, and you need to go into less depth in your investigation.


Reference letter on mathjobs - more than one X is writing a reference letter for me, to be uploaded to mathjobs.org. He wants two generic reference letters - say one for tenure-track positions and one for postdocs. X did upload two letters, but the only differentiation between them is a different time stamp. I never uploaded reference letters, so don't know the interface, hence my question - is it possible to put some names to the reference letters, so that I can easily see which one is which?

Thank you

MathJobs has a demo server which is a good way to see what other roles see.

For a letter already written and uploaded, the letter writer can log back in and select the letter from their list:

This brings up a form with various options for the letter.  One of them is a text field for "Entry Name":

They can type in something descriptive, and then check the box "allow applicant to see Entry Name".  Then click "submit" to save the changes, and confirm on the following screen.

There is a similar "Entry Name" field, and "allow applicant to see" checkbox, when uploading a new letter.

Then as applicant, when you apply for a job that asks for letters, you can click the yellow down arrow to see the list of letters from this writer, and you will see the "Entry Name" description for each one.  It looks like by default all letters from the writer will be available to the employer, but you can click the green check mark to unselect letters that are not appropriate.

(As a general comment, whenever you have a question like this, where you want to do something but can't figure out how, I have found that the MathJobs support staff are extremely helpful.  I've contacted them a few times with queries like "In my obscure situation, it'd be helpful to be able to do X".  Half the time the response has been "Yes, you can already do that, here is how", and the other half it's "That's a good idea, we went ahead and implemented it.  See what you think.")


Is an unexpected reference letter inherently a black mark? I recently applied for a math postdoc in Europe. I contacted the number of letter-writers requested in the job ad, all of whom agreed and sent in letters for me. I also included the names of these people in my application.
I then found out that someone else I didn't ask, but who knew I was applying for this job (and would have been my next reference if the number of letters requested was higher) sent in a letter on-spec, without informing me in advance. Is that going to hurt my application at all, assuming that the letter is good? I'm worried it will make me look disorganised for omitting a letter-writer name, or similar.

I doubt that it would be treated as a negative thing, but just a failure of communication. I think that in some places, however, unsolicited letters commenting on a person have legal issues.
You may be asked to explain it, of course, and you might want to talk to that letter writer as well so that you understand what happened. Perhaps they misunderstood something, perhaps something you said.
A negative, but unsolicited, letter might be a serious issue some places and I think that some countries in EU make a point of regulating such things. Maybe elsewhere as well.
However, if they ask for three letters and get four, they might be required to discard one of them and you might not know which. But, in this case, you already told them who would be writing, so it is more likely that the unsolicited letter would be dropped. There doesn't seem to be any interpretation that suggests you were dishonest in any way.


How to convince a Doctoral Committee to accept me as a PhD student when I already have a PhD in a similar field? I have completed my Ph.D dissertation in Pure Mathematics this year  from a relatively lesser known University.
I have been through these questions like Considering a second PhD, this time in statistics. Will any professors be interested in working with me? and Is doing two PhDs a good path?.
However I am interested in pursuing a PhD again in another branch of Mathematics  from a graduate school which is a very well known University.
The University where I want to apply  does not have any age limit for pursuing a PhD.
I want to shift from my current research field to another field as I have become interested in it recently.
I also believe that getting a PhD from top-tier institution will increase my chances for getting a tenure track position.
My questions are:

How do I convince the interview committee that I want to complete another PhD in mathematics/Theoretical computer science as I am genuinely interested.

Also I enjoy remaining a student as long as I can. I enjoy taking courses and writing papers.
Will that be also a valid reason to tell the interview committee.

My advisor feels that my chances of getting another PhD in Maths/TCS are slim since I already have a PhD and the interview committee would consider this as a waste of time and resource to hire me as PhD student again.

The problem is I don't like the fact that I will no longer be a grad student anymore.
I like this whole concept of doing research and getting paid(though meagerly but it still suits me).
If someone could help me with my queries, I will be grateful.

I agree with your advisor that most people would consider that the purpose of the doctorate is to teach you how to be a researcher and another degree isn't going to give you anything you don't already have. And giving the opportunity to another student is a positive good in the eyes of many, possibly most.
Moreover, if your goal is to do research and get paid for it there are better ways to achieve it. You should put your efforts into those instead.
But, to answer your question, about the only way I can think of to achieve this goal is to find someone who has a project and a very specific need for assistance that only you can fill. Possible? Sure. Likely? Not so much. And you would be better off doing a post-doc with them in any case. The pay would be better. You would have an opportunity to learn. Etc.
There is nothing stopping you from learning even outside a formal program. It takes a slightly different kind of discipline, but no more or less than that of a degree program. You can also build a circle of collaborators to help you find interesting ideas that commonly come up in class/seminar situations. You should probably explore that option in any case.


Is it common for professors to use questions from the internet on an exam? I'm in Western Europe doing a Master's degree, and I expected the education quality to be much higher then what I've seen in my previous school which was in the Middle East, but some professors here still do this (taking exam and exercise questions from the internet) and they don't seem to understand the subject very well.

Now how common is this in European and North American universities? Is it even considered an accepted practice?

they don't seem to understand the subject very well.
You sound like you are in a level of expertise that you could judge the quality of the lectures. You may then ideally speak to the professor about your allegation they still do this. I am ignoring the regional limitations and considering the question in a general context.

  Is it even considered an accepted practice?

Assuming that there are no institutional guidelines that goes against assembling questions from the internet(which you must check if you haven't done already!), from a logical perspective viewing this as a student, the practice is similar to posting questions from the text book or peer reviewed journals. The professor in any case is responsible for the question and its relevance can be questioned with supporting evidence.

From the point of view of a student, you could also do a student peer review about the quality and relevance of the question supported by discussions and critical reasoning. If the result of such an assessment goes against the question, you could then report him/her with proof your views about the practice.

NOTE - This is not limited to internet based questions but also any questions even from the sources you think are authentic.


Should a CV for a fellowship application ever include test scores even if these scores are not requested? I did quite well on my GREs -- perfect scores on all three sections of the general test, and a result in the 98th percentile on the relevant subject GRE test. I'm applying for Ph.D. programs in a STEM field and will naturally submit these scores as part of my application.

However, I'll also be applying for fellowships like the NSF graduate fellowship and the Hertz. It's my understanding that these fellowships do not require the GRE, but I would assume these strong scores might work in my favor if the relevant committees were to know about them. Can/should I include these scores on the CV I submit with my application, or is doing so always considered gauche?

If you are going to cite your scores, then you should check to see if there is a reporting mechanism from ETS that will allow you to send official copies of the scores to the recipients. For instance, NSF had a "college code" so that you could send a report directly to them. Other fellowships may be similar.

One caveat that should be mentioned: if a university or fellowship specifically instructs you not to send something, don't send it. I know that some schools do not want and will not accept additional letters of reference, award citations, publications, and so on. If this is the case for the specific application you're completing, then you'll want to find some other way to provide the information. This might be in the form of a mention in one of your essays (if appropriate!), or in a "supporting information" box in the application.


"Fake" Things that are used in Experiments What do you call the "things" that you used in experiment, but not in real life? Things that are made for experiment/simulation purpose. For example, phantom for human body.

At the most general term, you would call it a model. An animal model, a mannequin that models human movement/bones/flesh/weight, a drug that models the effects of XYZ in vivo. Whenever we can't use/describe nature directly, we use/describe a model.