What do mathematics researchers do if they aren't good? I am a high school student so I don't know much about academia, but I would like to clear up some confusion I have over research in mathematics. Please excuse my naivite/ignorance on this topic.

I get the impression that mathematics research at the graduate and post-doc level is hard. It could take months of getting nowhere before you make some progress on a problem, and depending on how good you are and the difficulty level of the problem, you could go an entire year without publishing any papers. I get the impression that proving interesting or important results is even harder and is really only for the best - the real mathematicians. By important I mean results that will be noticeably useful to other researchers in the field.

I am guessing that not every person who gets a PhD and goes into research is good enough to prove interesting or important results, and I'm guessing that the percentage of PhD's who go into research and who will become successful mathematicians is less than 50%. I'm wondering what do these people do? If they can't publish enough papers and they aren't successful in solving any problems, they can't continue like this forever right? I mean at some point the university they are employed by will reject them? Do these people leave academia entirely and go into industry, or switch fields into physics or something like that?

Please let me know if my understanding is correct.

Many people who complete PhD's in mathematics end up leaving academia within a few years after completing the degree.  Many others settle into teaching oriented positions at community colleges, four year colleges and regional comprehensive universities where they typically end up publishing little or no research.  A small percentage of all PhD's in mathematics end up as tenured faculty in research universities (much less than 20%) and even among these mathematicians at research universities there is huge variability in research productivity (e.g. as measured by papers published per year) and impact (e.g. as measured by citations of these papers.)


Tenure and tenure denial rates by universities Is there a way or website to find the tenure and tenure denial rates by universities and departments? I heard from some faculty that the tenure rate at X university is Y%, so I wonder if there is a way to find the statistics for all universities.

No.  Most institutions would consider tenure denial to be a confidential personnel matter.  This information probably cannot even be obtained using freedom of information laws.

A small portion of institutions have their newly tenured faculty announced in Inside Higher Ed.

You can estimate faculty retention rates by viewing archive.org's records of the list of faculty on the university website.  In practice, tenure rates are not as important as retention rates.  There's no point in getting tenure at an institution you don't want to work at.


Informal vs Formal Acceptance (Graduate) So I might just be really paranoid
But I received an informal acceptance email from my potential faculty advisor! Yay! Really good fit for me!

But...Should I be feeling like I'm not really accepted, and that I shouldn't get my hopes up? I went to celebrate last night and now I feel really guilty.

The email says that I have been accepted, but the formal letter has not been released because of pending funding decisions.

What does that mean? "Pending funding decisions"

Thank you everyone! And happy New Year's!

"Pending funding decisions" usually means that they are awaiting the results of grant and fellowship applications.

If you're applying to a university that does department-wide admissions, then they are probably trying to figure out the funding situation for the entire class before sending out the formal letters, since the formal letters normally specify the funding source as part of the statement.

If you're applying to a university where individual faculty members handle their own hiring, then they might be trying to figure out which funding source they will be using to pay your salary or stipend.

But usually a faculty member is not going to tell you "you've been admitted!" if they're not sure they'll be able to pay for you, so you shouldn't feel guilty about celebrating a little.


Faculty hiring differences in Theoretical Computer Science between US and UK/Germany I'm a PhD student in theoretical computer science in the US. This question contains some great answers on how to get a faculty job in Theoretical CS. I wonder whether there are some significant differences if I will be looking for a position in Europe (in particular, UK and Germany) as opposed to in the US. As a PhD student in the US (who's neither a US nor an EU citizen, if that matters), should I do something differently? Some aspects:

Is there more/less weight placed in UK/Germany on professional services such as journal/conference reviewing?
Is there more/less weight placed in UK/Germany on publishing in journals as opposed to conferences?
Should I try to get to know more professors in UK/Germany through conferences? What about doing an internship/research visit/postdoc in UK/Germany?

Other differences are also very welcome.

The UK system is quite different from the US system I believe.

In the UK there is no real schedule to hiring for example. Universities just advertise whenever they want to hire someone and quite often with a very small time window until the deadline for applications.
TCS of the sort a US academic would recognize is unlikely to be very well represented in a UK university, with a tiny number of exceptions. You are likely to be judged by people outside your field who don't have any natural sympathy for your research area. For example, telling them you have X FOCS and STOC papers will likely mean nothing to them. Further, as they are conferences there is a risk they will regard them as essentially equivalent to non-refereed workshops.  They are likely to rate journals more highly than conferences but they are also likely simply to count citations.
UK universities in general highly rate grant income. This may be the same as the US of course.
There is an official system of rating UK departments by the government (the REF) which makes a large difference to the income they receive. One key element is the impact of your top 4 most important papers published in recent years.  You need to play to that.
Some regard industrial partnerships as particularly important.
You may in fact find you are more suited to a Math department in the UK, depending on what your research is in exactly.
Some have an unhealthy obsession with citation metrics (H-index etc.).

In short, if you have papers in Nature (or another general interest journal) or papers that are cited hundreds or thousands of times and have lots of grant income you will be in a very good position. If you have only STOC/FOCS/SODA papers that are cited a few dozen times, little grant income and no industrial links you may find things harder unless you find the one department that is looking to expand in your area.


Can a single bad letter of recommendation ruin my chances of getting admitted to grad school? I am dealing with one very mercurial professor and I had a bit of an incident with him. I think I might have offended him slightly (I told him about the deadline to submit a letter of recommendation (LOR) in the nicest possible way and yet he flared up on me). My seniors tell me that he has the habit of extracting revenge on people who ask him for a LOR if they irritate him. I am afraid I might have offended him; he kinda scares me. But he is a very good researcher in computer networks and I performed well in his class. I don't want to drop him and choose another faculty.

Now I know very well that the other two lecturers are going to rate me well, but if this lecturer gives me a bad rating will it harm my chances of getting admitted?

Pick someone else if it isn't already too late.

The actual answer to your question is this: It is far better to have a good letter from a faculty member who is relatively unknown than a bad letter from someone they recognize and respect.  In fact, the latter is probably the worst thing that could happen.

If it is already too late, i.e. you have asked Professor X, he's agreed, and you've sent him the material (which is probably an online link these days) then work hard to make writing the letter easy.  Put together the following information and send it fast:

Include your student number.
Remind him which of his classes you have taken, and when.
How did you distinguish yourself in those classes?
How would you describe yourself? What are your strengths? What are your weaknesses? He is going to have to answer those questions when he writes your reference, so the more details the better; but these must be things your referee knows himself.
What are some of your academic and nonacademic accomplishments that he may not remember?
What makes him particularly qualified to write a letter for you? That is, why should the recipient of the letter value it over a letter from someone else?

This goes in an email that says, "Thank you very much for agreeing to write a reference for me on very short notice.  I hope the following will be of use to you when you write it."


Confidential research project I am working on a confidential research project. I'm not allowed to talk to anybody outside of the group without explicit permission. However, my colleagues from other groups are curious of what I am doing. I don't want to damage the working relationship but I just can't share too much details. Should I lie something (they won't know) or ask them to shut up?

It is perfectly fine to say: "I am working on something, but I was told by my boss Dr Who to keep it confidential. You can ask Dr Who if you are interested."


What does "International Journal of" mean or imply? It can be argued in this day and age that virtually all academic journals are international, since they are online. Anyone with an internet connection can read and submit their work to journals, independent of their physical location or nationality (assuming they are not paywalled, which is still an international issue). The editorial boards of most reputable journals are international, and so are the reviewers. Even the companies that dominate the academic publishing are multi-national entities. Despite this, many journals include the term international in their name, usually in the form: International Journal of [Something].

What does it mean or imply for an academic journal to be international and so entitled?

Does it mean that the founders of the journal were an international team? Does signify that its policies somehow promote internationality among the journal's editorial board, reviewers, and/or paper authors? Does it pertain to the journal's policy in selecting content to avoid focusing on the issues relevant to a locale and reflect a culturally diverse range of concerns? Is it merely a historical artifact from back when being international was a significant achievement, no longer practiced by founders of new journals?

It means nothing, as mentioned in the comments. A new journal must take a different name from existing ones, but usually wants to convey by its title what its subject is, e.g. Finance. If "Journal of Finance" is taken, one option is to name the new journal "International Journal of Finance". There are other options: "Journal of Financial Studies", "Review of Finance", "Finance Bulletin", "Finance Advances" or simply "Finance".

There is the marketing aspect that the journal name should sound fancy and intellectual, so "Blah Finance" is not a common title choice.


PhD Application - if/where to explain reasons for poor GPA 10 years ago This is a follow-up to my previous question. I'm currently in the process of applying for PhD programs. I finished college with a poor GPA 10 years ago; since then, I have become a successful scientist in industry.

Some of the applications have an interesting question, on the lines of - "does your academic transcript properly represent your abilities" - which I assume is a space to explain why a poor GPA happened in one's past and how one has moved on.

My top choice program, however, has no such question. I did email a prospective guide and had a quick phone call with him about my interests, where he agreed we would be a good match and asked me to add his name in my essays so my application would be routed to him.

I've read several articles on how a statement of purpose should highlight only one's strengths and not gloss over poor performances (especially since they were 10+ years ago), but I'm concerned that without an explanation my application wouldn't be given a second glance. In the best case, I would be invited for an interview and at that point I could explain what went wrong and how I've moved on from it.

So what would be my best bet here?

Mention nothing in my essays, focus only on the positives and hope that the other facets of my application would intrigue the adcom to a point where they'd ask me for an interview?
Add a short blurb as to what went wrong, but without going into the gory details?
Go all in and explain everything?

Explain poor grades in your statement of purpose/essay, which is where evaluators are going to look for it. These statements can be up to a couple of pages long, so you can (and should) spare a paragraph (or two, if necessary) to the topic. The explanation must be detailed enough to give a reader a picture of what happened, and the confidence that the underlying problems have since been addressed.


Tenure Track Positions What is the difficulty of landing a tenure track professorship at a top 25 program nowadays? I am considering pursuing a PhD in mathematics (thinking applied or computational) and curious on what the market is like. For example, If I attended a top math program (just say Columbia), what are the chances of landing a professorship at a program like UCLA or UT Austin?

It is very hard.

A few years ago, a professor I had had told me that he advises students to aim to get a job at a school a tier or two below where they went to grad school, as a general rule. The reasoning is simply that there are far too few jobs. How many graduate students are in a cohort at Columbia? Now compare that to the number of new faculty they hire each year.

The math is straight forward: If every university hires one new faculty a year, that means that you need to be (on average) the best at your university to get a job at an equivalent institution. Most universities have more than 10 incoming graduate students. I don’t know how many new faculty top math universities hire on average, but I would be shocked if the answer was greater than 2.


Can I use downloaded PDF English Language Course Books for teaching my students? I am an English language teacher about to start private online teaching.  A friend pointed me to the academia website as it provides old editions of English File student course books to download for free.  Can I simply download them and ask my students to download them and then run classes using them?  I'm assuming that there must be copyright laws prohibiting this, but then why would the books be available for free download?

You'd have to check the license that should come with the files (assuming the distributor is on the right side of the law). Possibly you can, possibly you can't.

I'm assuming that there must be copyright laws prohibiting this, but then why would the books be available for free download?

Because there are pirates in the world.


What is the difference between the Method and Experimental Setup section I am writing a Computer Science paper, however my supervisor wants me to describe the methodology in a more general form in the Method section. In the Experimental Setup section I dive into the details. My question is, what is general?

I always assumed that the Method and Experimental Setup  were one section were you describe your setup/method in detail.

The answer to this question depends a little on the field of application.

Method

In fields like computational sciences, this is the section where you describe a set of algorithms to be implemented. In fields like material engineering and life sciences you describe the general procedure to be followed to solve the problem defined in the problem statement. General in here refers to more of an overview of your implementation rather than its deeper aspects.

Experimental Setup

This is where you explain the implementation aspects in detail. You where and how the algorithms are applied in computation. You depict the use of instruments, apparatus, and other tangible items in material engineering and sciences.

In short, I presume your supervisor wants you to give a breif overview of your implementation in the Method section and would like you to explain it in detail in the Experimental Setup section. However, the level of detail can vary widely among the above sections.


Can I submit/ArXiv without my advisor? I am being blocked from publishing my work I joined a research group of a faculty member in 201x, and worked with her for three years. During that time, I collaborated with a large hospital to perform research in the domain of medical informatics. I spoke about my research at two conferences; one was a talk, and the other was a poster presentation. My advisor asked me to write up the research in a paper around the second year, which I did. Around the third year, I decided to switch research groups, because of the relationship between me and my advisor going sour, and not having funding from her (I used to work part-time to fund my PhD research).

Once this happened, she withdrew her support from me publishing my paper and ordered that I give up my work to a fellow grad student. I told her, that my manuscript is in its Nth revision, and that I would like to take it to completion as first author. She was dismissive and didn’t offer any comments on my work. I told her, that, should I pass on my work, I would like to discuss authorship issues in advance, which she wasn’t ready to discuss. She ganged up my new advisor against me, and together they forced me to give up my code, results, paper drafts. I had to then leave the university without a degree.

Fast forward couple of years, I receive an email from a student in her lab (the student whom I had to hand over my work to), saying that they are publishing a paper, and have decided I am the fourth author. I read the paper and found out that it uses my experimental setup and design, data collection, and one of the ideas I had presented (the idea wasn’t the main crux of my paper, but I believe it was novel).

I want to

Publish my original draft in ArXiv/BioArXiv, as first author.
Request my advisor to cite my work in their publication.

Given how she behaved with me, I know that despite what I am asking for sounds fair, she is likely to object.

I am asking the community: Can I go ahead and ArXiv it without her permission? I could add her as an author, but not take her permission. Also, if you have any other ideas on how to deal with this situation please let me know.

(For the record, this was at a top-10 school in the US in an engineering department).

I suggest you respond to the student and your former advisor roughly as follows:

You do not consent to their proposal to publish the paper, as prepared, with you listed as 4th author. You believe that the substance of your contribution entitles you to first authorship, either on this paper, or on another paper to be published with citation priority.
You understand that your decision to withhold consent blocks the publication of the current work.
You would welcome an amicable resolution to the impasse that meets the needs of all parties.
Your proposal is [** what you said above **].
You welcome any alternative proposals from them for how to divide the work, in ways that are fair, and consistent with previous understandings and contributions.
You propose that if you cannot between yourselves craft a mutually acceptable solution within a reasonable timeframe -- say, 30 days -- then the matter should be submitted to the University Ombudsperson with a request to help mediate the dispute.
** [Edited:] If asked: You are open to alternative proposals for referees, but you want to keep the Ombudperson involved as the core arbitrator. (The reason: Other mediators might be more knowledgable about the professional and intellectual details of the case, and thus might be genuinely helpful. But they might be your ex-advisors allies, and/or craven cowards who just want problems to go away.)

I would cc everybody concerned on your letter, including the office of the University Ombudsperson. This last cc gives the Ombudsperson a 'heads up', and also puts a time-stamp on your letter with a (we hope) neutral third party. It also serves as a 'cease and desist' demand temporarily blocking any attempt to submit the paper for publication without your consent.

I am sorry you find yourself in this difficult situation.


How much does it cost the publisher to transform the draft of a textbook as given by the authors into a final publication (for web or print)? I wonder what are the actual costs of translating a manuscript of a textbook as given by the authors into a final publication (for web or print). I.e., ignoring the costs of marketing the textbook, and printing the textbook, and serving content via web.

I am mostly interested in the fields of computer science and maths, English-speaking venues, and the United States, but I am curious about other fields, languages, and countries as well. I am looking for referenced numbers, not guesses.

Given the number of downvotes and close votes from people who seem to think it's impossible, here is an example…

The costs are going to depend on three factors: (1) how long the book is, (2) how well written the book is, and (3) how much layout work the publisher does.

For example, in Math, the publisher might provide a LaTeX template and expect you to hand tweak underfull and overfull lines, float placement, and hypenation. In other fields it is more typical to give the publisher plain text with minimal markup.

The Editorial Freelancers Association publishes recommended editing fees. A typical book might have a round of "line editing" at 4 cents per word, a round of layout at 4 cents per word, and a round of basic copy editing at 2 cents per word.

If the book is poorly written, two rounds of line editing might be needed. If there is automated layout, the layout costs could be saved. There is also the cost of creating an index at 2 cents a word, which depends on who makes the index.


How high should I rate a good student for PhD admission? I am a relatively young faculty member. I was asked to provide a reference for a student of mine so he is admitted in a PhD program in Sciences in UK. The student is probably one of the best students I had in a couple of years in terms of academic potential. I firmly believe he will do well as he is bright and hard-working.

I have to fill in an online form rating him. My problem is that the form's scaling is very strong.
How can I honestly say that someone was outstanding (3%) and not exceptional (1%)? Even the third most positive option is unusually good (rated at 10%) which I feel as a characterization in itself should be strong enough for someone to be at least considered for a PhD.

My classes are never above 40 to 45 students and I believe that simply "lumping" all the students from my past couple of years in one sample is ineffective and unreasonable. I would probably be unable to single out one of my students as the single best student I've ever had so that I can place him in the top 1% interval with certainty and not top 3%.

As I said, I want to support him and I worry that simply putting him down as outstanding would harm him as other referees might be tempted to "max out" everything. On the other hand simply rating him as exceptional in almost all aspects would be just grade-inflation.

Could someone provide me with some advice on the matter and what they would do? The scaling I have come across before topped at 5% which I found reasonable but here this not the case.

The question of gauging inflation in these situations is both serious and important. It affects peoples' lives!

The difficult task of the letter writer is to visualize what other letter-writers will say, their degree of effusiveness. "Being brutally honest" is obviously stupid and naive to the point of destructiveness.

The operational issue is about achieving the desired effect. And, in particular, if your recommendee is fairly exceptional, it would be a grievous error to praise them "modestly". Yes, the problem is to discriminate between "fairly exceptional" and "exceptional" and "truly exceptional". And these are not things that can be rationally discussed about young people by committees...

Thus, consider the noise in the system into which you put your information...


Dipl. Math requirements I would like to know what are the (academic) requirements (in general) of a Dipl. Math.?

What Dipl. math. Is good for (in math Academia)? More general what is a Dipl. Math.?

(Some reference for cover letters for Dipl. Math.)

Dipl.-Math. stands for Diplom-Mathematiker. It is a German academic degree and equivalent to a master’s degree.
Before Germany adopted the bachelor/master system, a Diplom (diploma) was awarded to students after finishing about five years of study and writing a thesis.
Almost all German universities now award bachelor’s and master’s degrees, but at some universities, students can choose to have their degree called Diplom after completing a master’s program.


Applying for jobs without significant publications: is it worth the pain and what to highlight? I'm in a conundrum.
Due to a change in areas half way through my PhD, I find myself at the end of my training with no significant publications. I have one in press, and several in prep so in the next year I should have 3-4 if all goes well. I'm also at a top ten university in the US and have good recommendation letters etc...

My issue is: I need to get a job as soon as possible in Europe to be with my partner. I have applied to both post-docs and to some assistant professorships at smaller schools in his city thinking I should at least try but I'm feeling seriously under-competitive where the norm in my field is at least three papers by graduation.

I have an option to stay on as a grad student for a 6th year at my institution, but it would have to be remotely (as I will move to Europe anyway) and frankly, I don't want to have to do that (both because it's too hard to do research and I make little money). But it is a safe option, and might give me time to write up all the backlogged data I've recently acquired.

So my options are to take an extra year with very little pay and apply later, or apply extensively and effortfully to jobs that will probably reject me, though there is a small chance I'll get one.

In your experience, will people even consider PhD's with very few pubs, or impending pubs, and if so, are there things I can do to make my application look more competitive, e.g. should I explain myself (I don't want to make excuses though) or highlight grants and presentations?

Or should I just cut my losses and suffer through living abroad with no money and taking the extra time I would have spent applying to a million places to write up a bunch of papers and then try again next year with more confidence and competence, and maybe landing a better job?

Thanks!

UPDATE: I ended up getting short-listed for five institutions, two of which are top-tier, and ultimately was offered two assistant professorships and one post-doc. I am sure I would have been better off with more pubs but I'm glad I ended up applying for reach jobs as ultimately I think I ended up with some great choices, met a lot of people in the field, and most importantly, got a job!

Thanks for all your input.

Disclaimer: this question is seriously underspecified. For a reasonable answer we would probably need at least the city you are looking for, your field, your qualifications beside publications, etc.

That being said, I feel that the Assistant Professor market in Europe is insanely dry in most fields, and, honestly, getting an Assistant Professor position directly after your PhD graduation is very unlikely even with an extremely good CV. If your CV is not absolutely top-notch for your field, I am afraid applying is largely a waste of your time. On the other hand, at least in my field, getting a PostDoc is often comparatively easy and uncomplicated, and reasonably payed in many places. A PostDoc is also a really good time to write up a backlog of publications and improve one's CV, so maybe this is what you should be shooting for.


Conflict with conference Program Committee I was reviewing a paper for a conference. As I wrote in the review, it was IMO a completely average paper (boring problem, boring techniques, average write-up). I gave a scoring of "0" (ranging from -3 to +3) noting that it could, potentially, deserve publication if there is any space.

After submitting my review, I received a message from the program chair saying roughly the following:

  as you can check there are some rather different reviews regarding this submission. Please feel free to comment on it or change your score in case you think it is appropriate.

There were 2 other reviews: The 1st liked the paper and gave a +2. The 2nd however had virtually the same review as mine but felt probably slightly more generous and gave a score of +1.

1st minor Question: Is it normal PC members to ask you change the review score when the review does not vary significantly from the others? I never heard such a thing, even in personal cases where was a large deviation between reviewers.

I was trying to understand the logic behind the PC message. My Theory:

  I think the PC members wanted to accept the paper but because they did not have an overwhelming argument and because the average review score was lower than the acceptance threshold they were unable to justify the acceptance. Instead of altering my score at their own will, they asked me gently if I am willing to do that.

Is my theory plausible?

2nd minor Question: Since my review was virtually the same to the one of the 3rd reviewer, wouldn't it be more fair if all other parties were involved in that exchange? Maybe the 3rd reviewer would have change the score to "0" after reading my response. Why this process should involve only me?

I responded by noting the above and by standing by my initial decision and score because I really felt it did not deserve anything more than "0".

3rd Minor Question: Do you think my response was appropriate, given the circumstances? Was there any other way that I could have handled the issue?

Now, this is my final (conditional) main question:

  Given the fact that my "theory" is correct and given the particular circumstances (slight variation on reviewer opinion), is it common to ask the reviewer to do their (the PC's) job of accepting/rejecting manuscripts when the reviewer's job is to provide an honest opinion? If yes, shouldn't all reviewers be aware (in case there is not some terrible misunderstanding/mistake in any of the reviews, just a matter of opinion).

Note: I was told after the event, that I was the only one that received that message. My guess is that the paper was close to acceptance but my score prevented it from being a clear accept (so they felt I was somewhat "harsh"). I guess that also explains why they did not contacted the +1 reviewer B (also to avoid situations that I change to +1 and B change to 0 after reading my justification, and we are at square 1). Any thoughts on that? Is this common?

First of all, I don't think there is a "conflict" as long as you don't make this one - and you really shouldn't, as there really is no indication of unethical behavior on their side.

Let's go over your questions.

  Is it normal PC members to ask you change the review score when the review does not vary significantly from the others? I never heard such a thing, even in personal cases where was a large deviation between reviewers.

In many conferences, there is a PC or reviewer discussion phase wherein, after everybody has formed her or his independent impression, these impressions are compared and discussed in one way or another. Optimally, there is physical PC meeting where borderline papers are discussed, but often a mail or forum discussion will do. "Amount of deviation" is not really the right metric to decide whether a reviewer discussion will make sense, but rather whether the paper is borderline or not. There is no point in discussing whether a "Weak Accept" should be a "Strong Accept" if everybody else voted for "Strong Accept", given that the paper will likely be accepted anyway. Similarly, there is little incentive to discuss a "Weak Accept" if everybody else voted "Reject" - the paper is likely dead. For a good conference, "Borderline", "Weak Accept", and "Accept" may just put the paper on the brink where it's not entirely clear on which side it will fall.

  Since my review was virtually the same to the one of the 3rd reviewer, wouldn't it be more fair if all other parties were involved in that exchange? Maybe the 3rd reviewer would have change the score to "0" after reading my response. Why this process should involve only me?

This is a good question, and in fact I think that the model of chairs communicating 1-on-1 with the reviewers is fairly ineffective (as compared to a reviewer forum, for example), although I know a few conferences that handle things like that. That being said, it makes sense to contact the person with the "lowest" rating first. Also, you don't know whether they have also contacted the other reviewers to take your review into account.

  I responded by noting the above and by standing by my initial decision and score because I really felt it did not deserve anything more than "0".
  Do you think my response was appropriate, given the circumstances? Was there any other way that I could have handled the issue?

Sure, your answer was completely ok. Note that, as said initially, you don't have a "conflict" now with the chairs - they asked whether you think your review was too negative given the additional information of the other reviews, and you said no. That's a completely valid discussion to have, and no side acted in bad faith here. From my point of view, there is no "issue to handle", just a conversation that you will have many times over as part of the peer review process.

The only thing that might be inappropriate (depending on phrasing) was noting that it was unfair that they contacted you rather than the 3rd reviewer. As said, this is probably a mail that they also sent in similar form to 2 dozen other reviewers, and they may not quite understand what the problem is. It's not like being asked whether you want to change your rating is a personal insult.

  I think it's responsibility of the PC to have valid arguments for acceptance. Is it ethical to put mild pressure on the reviewer to do their (the PC's) job of accepting/rejecting manuscripts? My job was to provide an honest opinion, which I did. My job is not to push a paper for acceptance because the PC run out of valid arguments.

I think you are overthinking this. I don't ready any pressure at all from the mailing you copied, and I have received similar mails many times over. Sometimes I changed my mind, sometimes I didn't. You provided an honest opinion, and they gave you some more info and asked whether your opinion still stands. I really don't see much agenda behind this.


How to set goals when the challenge is to continually, gradually improve? I  work in engineering education in Canada.  One of our biggest challenges is to instill the students with a desire to become "lifelong learners".  This isn't just an academic ideal, either - we are required by our accrediting body to ensure that students learn to learn, and engage with learning throughout their life.  This is notoriously difficult to do - how do you ensure that a student learned such things?

We often teach students to set goals.  However, I'm not convinced that goal setting is the right thing to do when the purpose is to continually, gradually improve.  Goals are, by definition, attainable milestones.  I feel that they are useful tools, especially in the short term, of course.  I set goals for myself all the time.  However, setting goals for the long term (as in, lifelong) is much more nebulous.

How can I encourage my students to continually monitor their own progress in the long term, without being concerned about the "end result"?

I think this is a very good question. Goal setting - as you mentioned - is a very useful tool to achieve milestones. The smaller the goals ("microgoals"), the more these follow the characteristics of a continuous growth curve. However, if I understand your question correctly, you might be looking more at something like "values" that you want to teach.

If lifelong learning is part of the curriculum, you face the question how to evaluate the process (?) and maybe more meaningful, how to teach something that ends up as an understanding of a useful value in the arsenal of a modern-day student. I'd suggest, the best way to achieve this is to 1) lead by example and to 2) provide further examples. Examples should come from someone whose achievements can be traced back to them learning specific new skills throughout life without which they could not have achieved what we currently perceive as their main achievement. You should by now have a few examples in mind of people in your specific niche that would be examples for this. Talk about them and how their willingness to continually grow and learn enabled them to achieve what they did. Doesn't have to take long, but should stick in students' minds.

Hope this helps!


Should I ask for a recommendation letter even if I have not applied for any programs yet I emailed some tutors from several years ago to ask for a meeting (as described in this question). I am happy to tell you that I have received another reply from my former school teacher. She had a trip to Japan for weeks and had not read any emails. She agreed to meet me at my former school.

I want to further my study and I want to seek more information from her.

I know that she is very busy, so should I make use of this opportunity to ask her to write to any recommendation letter for me even if I have not applied for any programms at a university?

Definitely, you should tell her that you would like to further your training. And since your former tutor know you well, she is one of the capable person to write this letter.

Meanwhile, she doesn't have to write it now and then - if you manifest the possibility of asking her in a near future for such a letter and she agree, this will still stand in a year or so.

It is hard to write a good and relevant letter in advance without knowing on which desk it will land on - so better make precision when you know more details, such as the institution, concentration, which possible supervisor, with hyperlinks to relevant pages in case she want more context.


Supervisors constantly rejecting my ideas. What to do? I just started my PhD. I work in an interdisciplinary field so I have 3 supervisors from different fields.
Up until now, we had 4 research meetings together and the weird thing was everytime I came up with an idea, it was immediately rejected. Although, they gave me reasons why they rejected it, it always feels like they didn't really understand what I was trying to say exactly. I did not want to push on because I fear it may make them feel dumb in front of others because they don't understand what I am saying.
But yesterday, we had another meeting and I got really annoyed. One of the supervisors came up with an idea and the others all thought it was a great idea. But I actually mentioned the idea a long time ago, but it was immediately rejected back then.
This makes me feel really depressing since it feels like it's mainly my fault for not communicating properly but at the same time it somehow feels like my supervisors are willfully rejecting my ideas because of my status as a fresh PhD student.
How do I deal with this?

When I was in medical devices we had lab books to support potential patent claims etc..
Write your ideas in a lab book.
If it happens again, you could try to say something like, 'I think I may have a communication issue.  I suggested this idea on xxx but it appears I may not have communicated the concept very well.  Perhaps I'm letting myself down in communicating my ideas very well.  If it happens again could you let me know so that I can better express myself.'
You've taken it on the chin, asked them for help in a non academic way and brought to attention your original idea.  Everytime they do it, you can remind them in this manner, they'll have to take you seriously eventually; if they continue to dismiss your ideas and then suggest them later, you'll have a strong record for challenging that behaviour etc..
Very importantly be respectful, they may just find it hard to understand you.


Applying to a masters program based on university rankings? I'd very much love to study Math at the University of Copenhagen.

Since I am an International Student and cannot really see the university before I apply, university rankings will greatly affect my decision.

My only problem is that this university ranks quite low according to Times Higher Education (160th)

I relied on rankings to choose to come to Canada and do my undergrad at UBC (32nd) And it has worked well for me so far.

If I happen to be clever enough to get into a top 50 university, would it be stupid to still go to Denmark?

Is it stupid to go to a university which is ranked around 160 by Times Higher Education for a Master's degree?  You should consider additional information.  First, I recommend deciding what you want to do after getting your master's degree.  Then consider if the degree program you are applying for will help you achieve that goal.  If you are not sure, check the program or school website for statistics, or contact the program's alumni for advice.

Since this is the academia stack exchange, let's assume for the moment you want to continue in academia.  In this case, the university's reputation (which is correlated with its ranking) is very important, but the specific program's reputation is even more important.  (edit: People who know little about you will judge you based on the institution/program where you got your degree, because it is easy for them.)  Working with a well-known faculty member can also have great importance.

Certainly rankings will not inform you if you will like living or working at an institution.  Finally, normally each time you change institutions the prestige of your new position will decrease.


Teaching subjects as an instructor which I scored average grades in As a final year PhD student, I have been asked to teach a short introductory course on solid mechanics for undergrad students. Now, my PhD research has been applied mechanics where I developed tools and carried out fundamental research on a manufacturing process. But, it was quite away from what we get taught in our undergrad and grad courses.

I had taken solid mechanics course during my undergrad time, but I remember not scoring well in my tests and assignments. Infact, I had got a B+ grade in the subject. I am confident about my knowledge on the important concepts, derivations and theories, but I am poor in solving problems at the back of the chapters.

I am wondering if anyone can give me some advice on how to prepare assignments and questions for the course? I will be taking 6 lectures, 2 out of which will involve giving a hands-on training on a software that I use for my PhD research.

I am worried about the first 4 lectures and developing assignment questions for the class. I have 3 weeks to prepare.

First, you are doing well to focus on exercises. Student activities are the most important part of any course preparation. In general, it is much more important what the students do in a course (exercises) than what the instructor does (lectures).

If you can recommend a textbook to the students it will have exercises from which you can choose. Or, you can tailor some of them specifically to the material you will be teaching if the book is a bit too general.

Alternatively you can adapt exercises from a variety of textbooks. An interesting way to do this is to give exercises from various books but cite them explicitly so that the students have an opportunity to go to those books (in the library, perhaps) and read some context to help them.

Finally, let me note that for your own learning, teaching a course in a subject is likely to deepen your own understanding of it. This is partly due to the reinforcement you get from preparing lectures, but also from responding to student questions and having to actually find ways to explain things in a way they can grasp.

As for the software, some exercises that depend on its use to solve some simple problems is good, but I suspect you know that already.

A trick for connecting to your students is to admit that the material is hard and that you also found it so as a student. This will put them on notice that they need to apply themselves, but will also make you more human and accessible in their eyes. This may be desirable or not. It is considered a good thing in the US, but perhaps not universally.


Reproducible, open, transparent, ethical Research when confronted to (patient) data anonymization : is it at all possible in practice? A lot of Hype goes in reproducible, open and transparency for data analysis theses days in some fields mores that other. The code is to be share as well as the dataset.
How to achieve this in a context of patient data protection that all ethics' committees will require ? What are the best practice to overcome theses antagonistics goals ?
My team seems to think patient's data protection means the data (already anonymized) shouldn't leak and thus we have to work on the database's server without ever getting the anon db on our stations. This feels a tad too much / an overkill ?

Its totally normal practice for patient data to be allowed to be stored only on properly secured, regulated and monitored servers.

In my field (genomics), databases exist where researchers can deposit anonymized patient data, that is not "publically" available, but can be accessed by users that can demonstrate that they have good reason to use the data, that their use falls within the consent agreement and have the IT systems in place to keep the data safe (see for e.g. dbGaP and EGA) by making an application to a data-protection committee.

Code can be written in such a way that no patient data is in the code (loaded from secure locations, etc), so that the code can be shared.


What to do when you have obtained very similar results with two different groups and you want to publish them both I started a collaboration with some other research group, where the main objective was to model some data. The project was very interesting to me, since I had obtained that data. After some months I got no news from them, I wrote them and they always told me they were very busy and had no time. I understood they were not interested anymore, so that I contacted another research group for the same collaboration objective, and this time, the collaboration progressed quickly, and we reached the stage where we are writing the paper about the modeling of the results. At this same point I got news from the other group, telling me they had obtained very interesting results with their modeling technique, and regretting the previous lack of contact. It turns out they have obtained much better modeling results than the "second" group. My problem is that I do not know what to do now. One option would be to publish two papers, one with each group, that would be very similar. Other option would be to decide for one of the two groups and go ahead, forgetting the other, but that would not be ethical. Perhaps a last option would be to publish both papers, bur giving them very different focus and audience.

What would you do here?

I'm surprised you did not mention the option that I would probably do: combine all data into one paper. Based on your description it sounds as if both data support a similar hypothesis/line of enquiry. If that is the case, publish one much stronger paper using two independent sets of data. All authors would need to be included. You could check with both teams to see if they agree. Speaking of which, have you asked them what they want to do?


Which format should I use to submit a paper for review? I am going to submit a paper to the journal of ACM Transactions on web, there is an option for attached files named "File for reviewers". I guess it is the option I should choose, but I don't know in which format the file should be. As I searched the site there are a word and a latex templates for articles, but they might be for the final version of the paper?

Can I submit it as a unformatted word document, but enhanced for reading? or a pdf but not based on the template on the site? by the way, I found their template awful for the reviewing purpose.

Submit in the format they ask for, otherwise paper is likely to be rejected without being read. You won't be reviewing the paper, so don't worry about how awful you think it is.

It's all here: tweb.acm.org/author.html including

  Articles must follow the "Small Standard Format" described in the ACM formatting guidelines.


Should an assistant professor negotiate for a larger yearly raise before receiving tenure? At my university, we are informed of our yearly raise with a letter mid-summer. There is no scheduled meetings with the chair or anyone else to discuss performance or the raise -- as far as I can tell, we just wait and see what it is. It tends to be a small cost-of-living raise in the range of 3%.

Should a pre-tenure assistant professor actively seek to meet with the chair and ask/negotiate for a larger raise, or is this not done in academia?

Should a pre-tenure assistant professor actively seek to meet with the chair

Yes!

You should insist on meeting with your department chair at least once a year, if not once a semester, to discuss strengths and weaknesses in your evolving tenure case.  Make no mistake—your tenure case started evolving the moment you signed your offer letter.  If you are doing the right things to get tenure, you need to hear that.  If you are missing something important, you need to hear that as well.  Symmetrically, if you think things are going well, your chair needs to hear that, and if you think things are going badly, especially if something in the department is proving to be a burden, your chair needs to hear that, too.

  and ask/negotiate for a larger raise

Oh, I suppose, if you have good pitch.  You're not going to get a bigger raise just because you ask for it.


What are common questions in an interview for a faculty position (W2/W3) in Germany and who is part of the panel? Which questions are commonly asked in an interview for a faculty position (W2/W3 professor) in Germany (German "Berufungsverfahren") and who is usually in the panel (dean, student respresentative)?

(my experience is in Computer Science, but I assume the following to hold true at least for the sciences in general)

  Which questions are commonly asked in an interview for a faculty position (W2/W3 professor) in Germany (German "Berufungsverfahren")

Your milage my vary, but classics are the following:

Questions that target how your research will fit into the current research strategy. Who can you collaborate with? What strengths of the program will you foster, which holes will you fill? Your goal here is to convince the committee that you are both, related to existing professors enough that you won't be the odd (wo)man out, and different enough not to be redundant.
Questions that target your teaching, most importantly which courses you could take over, which new courses you would introduce, and how these would enrich the current specializations and programmes. It's possible that they already have a concrete (set of) courses that they need you to teach, and then they may outright ask you if you would do that, and if so how.
Questions that target your funding acquisition plans. Which grants would you apply for initially? How much funding do you expect to be able to acquire? Are there any funds that you would bring with you? What group size would you expect to be able to maintain?
Questions regarding your package. You won't need to say a concrete salary figure at this point, but the committee will likely ask how many research staff you will ask for, and whether you have any particularly expensive other needs (e.g., a compute cluster, other equipment). Note that W3 professorships in Germany tend to be large, asking for at least 3+ staff as package to start negotiations with should be seen as normal.
Questions regarding your intentions w.r.t. this position. Would you be moving fulltime? Can you see yourself living in this place for the foreseeable future? Why is this position even attractive to you? The main point here is to figure out whether you just want to negotiate with your home (or some other) institution, which is incredibly common in Germany ("Rufabwehrverfahren").

It's also possible that you get some "content" questions regarding your research, but I think it's rather rare. Most importantly, note that the interview is not an exam - typically nobody will assume that you don't know how to do your research, but they will want to know whether you and your research are the best fit for their needs. This includes doing a fair bit of background preparation to figure out what their needs actually are. In a way, during a "Berufungsverfahren" you are pitching your detailed area of research as much as your person.

  Who is usually in the panel (dean, student respresentative)

This varies, but both the dean and a student representative are at least likely members. Note that "being present" is not the same as "having impact on the decision". In my experience, the number of people who actually make the decision is usually 2 or 3.


Professor got me involved into working with him, but the experience was poor. How can I avoid him without facing negative consequences? I am an undergraduate, #1 in my year in terms of GPA, and one of my professors asked me if I was interested to help him with a research competition. The goal was to publish a paper and hopefully win a reward.

Fast forward this professor is treating me like a slave (expecting email replies within 6 hours), his team is not interested at all (very slow, not working at all on the paper) and last time I talked to him he told me "maybe we won't make it in time for the competition". This is after I have spend 2 months working day and night on this.

I have passed his course so I am not scared of a bad grade. We have another 2 months for the competition.

He is also trying to "force" me do my thesis with him, something after everything that happened, I will never do.

I am very polite and he doesn't know I feel this way.

My goal is to end this ASAP and avoid him badmouthing me to other professors. Maybe he will submit a mediocre paper, maybe not, I really have no idea. Seems like he doesn't care at all about this competition and his goal was to make me work with him.

I would say there is no way to totally prevent badmouthing happening. You can adopt an extremely wise strategy to get yourself out of that shet, but, you know, he can (if he wants, of course) use the fact that you quit before you should to condemn you (I hope this will not happen.). So I think what you want is to be honest to him about how you felt. Try not to talk to him in a tone that judges; try to first report or state what you saw neutrally and then tell him how these led to your decision. If you can do this in a mature, unemotional, analytical way, and if he is at least a reasonable person, then I think you guys can break up peacefully. Be careful that you don't give him an impression that you did the decision majorly out of emotion; this would lead him to consider you an unprofessional "employee" (if this is the case, who knows what implications he can come up with to harm you; you want to minimize the potential negative consequences.) .

If you did the above, then simply walk away and pay no mind to the consequences.


Advisor-student meeting patterns in very high-end theoretical research This is related to my previous question: “What is the optimal number of times one should meet one's PhD. advisor?”

I want to know of specific details of advisor-student meetings, frequencies, patterns in very high-end theoretical subjects like say algebraic geometry or string theory. Like if anyone knows of accounts of how it goes for say students of Vafa or Witten or Nima or Seiberg or Xi Yin or Kiran Kedlaya or Mattihas Zaldarriagga or Bjorn Poonen and such.
In such subjects how does one keep oneself motivated since publications aren't so regular probably and progress is possibly very "slow"?

I mean, in such subjects how does one measure progress on a daily/weekly basis to understand if things are going well? (once the instant gratification of homework scores are removed, in full time research mode how is progress measured on weekly scales?)

Once the instant gratification of homework scores are removed, in full time research mode how is progress measured on weekly scales?

There are three ways to make progress.

The big picture: identifying problems to work on, conjectures and consequences, outlining potential proof techniques.
The little picture: examples, computations, completing the proofs of individual lemmas.
Background reading/study: figuring out what you need to know and learning it.

In any given week it's reasonable to expect some progress on at least one of these.  It might not be dramatic or important progress, but at least you can work out some more details for a key example or read another chapter in a book you need to get through.  You can also refine your ideas, for example by identifying obstacles or additional ideas for a proof outline.  This sort of progress is on a much smaller scale than a research paper, but it lets you measure your progress and ensure your research is on track.

It might occasionally happen early in grad school that you spend a week feeling bewildered and completely unsure of what to do, but at that point your advisor should intervene and help you find something productive.

  I want to know of specific details of advisor-student meetings, frequencies, patterns in very high-end theoretical subjects like say algebraic geometry or string theory.

I don't think this would be as illuminating you as hope.  There's not a lot to learn from these patterns, and what you do learn could even be misleading: one advisor's approach might be a poor fit for another advisor, and a famous researcher may or may not be a wonderful advisor.

However, if you are looking for examples, Kiran Kedlaya and Ravi Vakil have descriptions on the web of their advising styles.  (As one would expect, they differ in some respects, for example on meeting schedules.)  Some of the details are probably relevant only if you are considering them as possible advisors, but both pages contain some excellent advice that is more broadly applicable.


Is it fair to withhold test and assignment memorandums at tertiary educational institutes? I have a module at university that broadly covers data structures and algorithms. The subject coordinator of said module simply refuses to supply any feedback or opportunities to students that want to learn from their mistakes.

He states that doing so does not promote students to think for themselves, or simply that no such documents (i.e. memorandums) exists (which I know to be false).

Is this rationale generally accepted amongst lecturers?
Is it fair to deprive students the opportunity to learn from their mistakes?

There may be many reasons why no feedback is given; complexity of the undertaking, legal issues, organisation etc. However, not promoting students thinking for themselves, as reason, simply does not make sense. Of course, students need feedback. Assuming, however, you got feedback during the course, the feedback from the assessment is not really central anymore.


What can we do to increase student engagement? My University has recently started recording lectures and posting them online. We have also, in the past few years, noticed a considerable drop in lecture attendance across the whole Physics and Astronomy department (even in courses that are not recorded).

I expect that the advent of recorded lectures is a significant contributor to this. However in the tutorial classes as well as lectures, it wasn't uncommon for attendance in the course I was TA for this semester to be below 50%. Myself and the lecturers are at a loss.

I am not necessarily against offering pittance marks for attendance, however I think that it is rather poor practice as it does little to encourage students to become genuinely interested in the material. Encouraging students to discuss science among themselves and become emotionally invested in the topic is the best way to get them out of bed and attending classes.

Does anyone have any "success stories" to share where they have significantly increased the level of student engagement in their course(s)?

My school has a mandatory attendance policy (which I know several members here disagree with) but because of that policy I have had to face with engagement in a different way that you. Still, I hope this answer will help.

Without engagement I find myself in large classes (sometimes >100) and classroom management gets to be a real challenge (for me and the other students). So, after trying a few different things I've found that challenging the students almost like a game show seems to be useful.

For example, in one module, I will give them scenarios (one at a time) to analyze (with multiple choice answers where each requires them to come up with their own reasons why that is the right answer). The scenario is short enough to fit on one slide and while the students are encouraged to read before class, they can still participate even if they did not do the work. This is particularly helpful to me since the ones who do not do the homework tend to be the hardest to control and, therefore, are the most disruptive to the learning environment. They tend to find it a challenge to see who can 'guess' right.

On top of this, I try to inject a little humor while walking around the room asking for analyses which tends to add a little entertainment aspect to the whole event.

For another module, I assess through an extremely difficult test which is quite common to fail unless extensive research is done. In this case, I alternate lecturer sessions (where I do most of the talking) and discussion sessions (where students do most of the talking). Engagement is not quite as strong with this module but I'm still honing it.

On a somewhat related note, you might check into this article on discovery based learning. I found it quite interesting.


What must a researcher know or understand about another researcher to ensure successful research collaboration? What must a researcher know or understand about another researcher to confidently conclude that he or she can become a good partner in collaboration? Specific opinions will be appreciated, e.g. the researcher must understand how his or her potential collaborator's skill set.

The most important thing to know about a potential collaborator is what their expectations are with respect to the collaboration.

For example,

Division of labor - who is responsible for which part of the work? If new tasks come up (as they will), how will the collaborators make decisions as to the division of labor?
Authorship - who will be an author on publications resulting from the collaboration, and in what order? If the collaborators are students, are they planning to involve their advisors in the joint research effort to the point that they'd also be authors? If the are professors, will they involve their students? How will decisions on changes to the author list be made?
Publishing - where will they publish articles resulting from the collaboration? Is one collaborator or another set on a specific venue, or specific level of prestige? Do the collaborators have a similar minimum level of reputation for conferences and journals they're willing to submit to? How do the collaborators feel about pre-publication dissemination of the work, e.g. preprints, presentations?
Timeline - what is the timeline for this research collaboration? Is this a strict timeline, or is it OK if things end up taking much longer?
Communication - how often will the collaborators check in with each other? Will they meet regularly, or just contact one another to share news (good or bad)?

There are of course no right or wrong answers to these questions; it's agreement that matters. More than any particular skill, compatible expectations are necessary for a successful collaboration.


Is it common practice for book reviews editors to be excluded from chief editor(s) meetings? I'm a book reviews editor (volunteer role) for a newly established journal (running just for the last couple of years). The journal has a couple of chief editors, myself as the book reviews editor, and then an editorial board. I manage the book reviews (including soliciting, organising, reviewing, editing, etc) which are eventually sent off to the editors for approval. We've never (to my knowledge) have had an editorial board meeting. The editors meet every two months to discuss the journal (strategic and administrative), but I have never been invited to these meetings.
Not having worked with a journal in this capacity before (I have guest edited special issues, published, and done peer reviews), I'm unsure as to whether or not book reviews editors should be included in at least some of these meetings/discussions since they pertain to the shaping of future journal issues (and book reviews may be a part of that, such as limits on word lengths, which books to focus on, etc). However, as I'm quite new to this, perhaps it is normal for such editors to be excluded from bigger picture meetings/discussions?
I have this horrible nagging feeling that I'm being excluded purposely because I'm a young woman working with older men, but I think I'm just overthinking it due to my lack of experience in journal editorial practices.
Edit/Clarification : This is a purely academic role. The editors are not paid for running the journal.

This is going to vary from journal to journal. Still, it's unlikely they're intentionally excluding you for nefarious reasons. More probably they're simply doing it because of inertia (it was always so, why change it?) or because they think you might not be interested (sociaca88 is probably busy and we're not paying her so we should try not disturb her, etc).
If you want to join the meetings, you can just ask. Be sure to mention "which books to focus on", which is a great reason for you to attend the meetings. They probably won't decline as well. Only caveat is there will probably be broad swathes of the meetings which are not relevant to you and might not be of interest to you.


What are the master's degrees in engineering a bachelor in computer engineering can be admitted in? What are the masteral degrees or courses a bachelor's degree in computer engineering usually leads to? Other than computer engineering itself, that is.

There are a plethora of the graduate programs, could which be taken into account by a grad with B.A.Sc. in computer engineering (CE), due to the interdisciplinary inherent of this field and considerable overlap between CE and many other majors. One might assert that the passed courses and the probable research experiences could pave the way toward some of the potential fields, noticeably.

If you are interested in/have passed courses about the electronics, computer engineer, CAD and VLSI and so no, you might be pursue a M.A.Sc. in electrical & computer engineering...

If you had some background in biological systems, bioinformatic, neural networks, implantable circuits for human body and so on, I can stress on biomedical engineering, as a potential graduate major for you...

If studying in the field of network and data transfer systems and architectures had been taken into account by you, putting aside ECE, you would be interested in media studies and related humanities...

You might be interested in robotics and had some experiences to work with them in view of algorithmic approaches or hardware-driven mechanisms. If so, computer science or mechanical engineering program could be fascinating for you...

I can continue this roster, as you wish!

Just clear your interests... The way itself will be emerged...

Best of luck


My problem about writing a technical/research report/paper I have seen several questions on this forum that have similar things and some of them have been quite satisfying for my quest. But I want to mention my specific case and want to have some useful suggestions, so I am writing this, which maybe or may not be a redundant question.

In my work as a research associate, I always have this problem which irritates me a lot.

Every time at the start I have to study something, of course related to my area but a somewhat new for me (painful, but this is what anybody has to take it to get the job done), learn it and apply it (I would say the apply part is the sweet/joyful pain).

Suddenly the next demand comes as "Write down" and it is where the pain concern ends and I start feeling as if my hands are cut and my mind is blank and "ME" can never do it.

Sometimes the demand is "Write down and make it as long as you can and we will make it short later", the torture is, for God sake I do not have even a few words to write!

Problem as I feel it:

Even after doing everything by myself, I feel that I can not describe it in writing. While if it is about describing it orally I am confident that I am much better than many.

When it comes to writing, I never know what to include and what not, especially when the demand is about as long as you can. I have had read tens of writings and have had done the things practically by myself but no idea what makes my mind blank about writing technical things.

I feel myself really good at doing technical things and love it.

Finally, I think I am missing some steps involved in that writing and I never miss the steps of doing things practically making me successful in that.

If these are steps, what are these?

If these are not the steps, what else are these?

Many times I have got my office reputation damaged because of going blank even after many days/weeks given to me for writing. I want to get rid-off this problem and want it never happen again. I would love to be the researcher who satisfies the demand of as long as you can?

A foot note: In general I do not feel myself bad at writing, though my answers to most emails and my own emails are mostly brief but satisfy the receivers. One more thing to mention that might be useful to assess/suggest me is that it took me around an hour to complete this question completely.

I suspect you are finding this difficult because you are trying to write in an academic style, and are judging yourself as you are writing. I think the secret to easier writing is to spend as little time as possible "writing". Instead, spend your time jotting quick emails and editing stuff. Let me explain what I mean.

Get together with someone who knows nothing about your research, and explain it to them. Record yourself, or at least take notes on the main points that you address.
Now write your explanation down, but informally, as if you were writing an email to a friend. Better yet, make it a real email -- that will help you keep it informal.
Also gather any other emails you've written to your supervisor, or colleagues and friends. (If you're not already doing so, get into the habit of writing those emails regularly, while ideas are fresh in your mind.)
Take those emails, and paste them into an empty document. This will be the starting point of your paper.
Now rearrange the information as needed, to make it coherent. Everywhere there's a gap, stick in a message like NEED TO EXPLAIN X HERE.
At this point, you're beginning to have an idea of the structure of the paper. This would be a good time to write an outline, to see if you've left anything out. This outline goes into the document along with everything else. (You can delete it before submitting the paper.)
Now fill in the gaps. But write informally, as if you were writing an email to a friend.
Now go through your document, and make the sentences more formal. Don't overdo it, though. You don't want your writing to be stilted; you want it to sound natural.

Congratulations. You have the first draft of your paper, and you barely did any real "writing"; it was mostly just writing emails and editing.

It's much easier to make informal, but clear, writing more formal, than it is to make formal writing more clear!


Does a prestigious internship (at google) help for PhD programs in Computer Science? If I have the option of choosing between a (non-research) internship at Google and a REU program at a non-prestigious university, which one should I select? After graduation, I intend to pursue a PhD in Computer Science, hopefully in machine learning.

Which of the two offers should I accept to improve graduate admissions? What if the intern position is directly in what I want to work in, i.e. machine learning?

I know research is valued more for graduate admissions, but a machine learning internship at google seems like a valuable asset.

Take the internship. It's not so much about whether it helps for graduate admissions or not, but rather how it is going to broaden your horizons. If you do the REU program, when you start the PhD, you're going to be doing similar things. On the other hand taking the internship gives you firsthand experience you cannot otherwise get:

What working in the real world is like
What skills are actively useful in industry
What skills you currently lack, but can learn in a PhD
What kind of job you can do if you get a PhD, but can't do now

(This neglects the financial aspect entirely, plus the fact that you're still going to be learning things during the internship which you can write into your application.) These things are likely to change your view of the PhD entirely. In the extreme case, you might find you don't want to do a PhD anymore. Less extremely, you'll have a better idea why you're studying, what you want to learn, and how that is going to help you.

tl; dr: do the different thing, because it'll act as a great enabler even if it's not immediately helpful.


Software to live-stream presentations I would like to be able to live-stream presentations online in case my school closes. My presentations are in power point. Ideally I would like to share my screen so I can use other software simultaneously. Finally I would like student to be able to ask questions from home and be heard by everyone, but I would like to have control over who is heard.

Any software recommendations? Even better if it's open source, or at least free

At my university we use Zoom.

It allows you to host a room, share screens, create "breakout rooms" for group work, etc. Don't know what the limitations are as far as how much the free version gets you, but it would be worth poking around with.


How to protect against the theft of a paper? A professor requested that I exchange my paper with another student, to get their suggestions. Every student in the course must exchange their papers in this way, before the teacher will look at it. I have never encountered another professor with such a policy and am concerned of the possibility that a student might claim my paper to be their own. What steps can I take to guard against such a possibility?

This seems like a reasonable request by the instructor. Without understanding why you are feeling vulnerable, it is not possible to provide an answer. It is worth talking to someone (possibly the instructor or maybe your advisor or a therapist) about why you are feeling vulnerable.

As for protecting yourself, emailing the document to/from your university email account is probably sufficient as documentation. The next level up would be to email the student the document with the instructor cc'd. This way you are proving you shared your paper (and gaining documentation). Anything more and you will likely be revealing your insecurities, which might lead to more insecurities.


What is the Doctor implying here? Last summer I did an Internship at a Company and after finishing it with a positive review, I received the offer to write my bachelor thesis in cooperation with that company.

After finding a suitable subject (taken from the list of available subjects) I contacted the Doctor that initialy posted the subject.

In his reply he told me that he would be interested in supervising me but he has to decline as he has not enough time and the University (Chair) would not reimburse him on supervising extern thesises.

Finally he re-emphasized that he is interested in the topic, and asked me to inform him when the company would find another contingence

I struggle to identify what he means by this.
My first impression is that he'd like to be compensated for supervising me by the company.

I don't know whether this is what he is suggesting or whether this would be indecent at all.

I'd like to here another opinion before proceeding.

The word contingency basically means "possibility". He can not supervise you now for the reasons he explained, but there is a possibility that in future he will. I would take it as a polite no.


How is feedback process done after submitting an article to arXiv? Another arXiv related question...

In several posts I have seen people talking about getting feedback after submitting article to arXiv

I have never submitted anything to arXiv before, so I have no clue how this is done. Is this just an informal procedure whereby other researchers in your field email you about your article?

Or is there a formal feedback process submitted through arXiv? Is this for available for public viewing or discussion?

How exactly is this done? Thanks!

There is no official protocol or formal procedure. Here is how I handle it.

I skim the arxiv submission in my fields of interest every day (headlines and abstracts). Every few days I find some things that I read in greater detail and if it happens that I find something that I'd like to discuss with the authors, I write a joint email to all of them. Could be a question for clarification, a hint for further reading or something like "look here, I've done something related". Once in while I take the time to write a blog post for some article and then it sometimes (rarely) happens that one of the authors comments on my blog.


Choosing research topic/area Observation. After reading bios of many successful scholars I have come to the conclusion that bs/ms/phd students, who eventually succeed in their research, work on the same problems as their supervisors (usually continuing older works of the supervisors). Which makes me think that the adviser plays the crucial role of the success of a beginner researcher.

Background. During last two years of studies I tried to do some research. I approached a prof who I considered among the most active researches on the faculty, not very young / not old, who's research was in the field (some branch of cs|applied mathematics) which I was and still am interested in. He proposed me several topics and I picked one. I tried to produce the result and failed. The difficulty was that: first, I lacked some necessary knowledge, there was no actual "problem", rather "try to get some theoretical result, connected to a certain algorithm". It was very frustrating experience because neither I understood why the topic is important (so I had no real passion) nor the prof had anything particular in mind and was not researching that topic so I was unable to get any research skill from collaboration.
Next year I have chosen another topic with same prof (I thought that the topic was to blame) with almost the same result.
So I don't have any successful research experience yet. For this reason instead of applying to a PhD program directly I have decided to do a Research Masters (in Europe). No that I am in the first year of masters I want to do some research.

The question. I am not sure if the problem lies with me or I am just having a bad luck with advisers. I believe that there are geniuses who can do self-motived research on their own and who do not actually need an adviser. Is it the case for other students too? How can I actually have a research experience which fits my level?

I tried to produce the result and failed.

As I see it, the issue here is that you were expecting the result to be some solution to the problem. Unfortunately, research tends to fail to produce results we expect quite often.

First, there is probably some result. Whether it is publishable is debatable, but I would consider the advance of the research skill a very positive result. As with all skills, it takes practice and you shouldn't expect to get it right (i.e. groundbreaking publishable results) the first (few) time(s).

Second, if you were stuck for a year without adjustment, that is a problem, not with research per se, but probably with a combination of supervision and communication. You need to set smaller milestones and adjust the course of your work accordingly. In order to do that, you must communicate with your adviser about the problems you are facing. His experience and knowledge should be able to nudge you in the right direction. However, do keep in mind that this is research, and a vital part of it is getting moving again after you've been stuck by yourself. Your adviser may help you, but can't and shouldn't do your work for you.


Do you not belong in a PhD program if you don't live and breathe your field of study? In my PhD program everyone talks about how passionate they are about their field of study, and how they go to seminars because they're fun.  Is it expected that PhD students truly love their subject, or is it enough just to do good work and publish papers?

This thread was prompted by discussion here.

In my experience, good primary investigators are always rather unbalanced human beings in one way or another.  If you aren't intensively passionate about something closely connected to the research process, then you can't last, because so much of leading research involves shaping your own agenda.  That said, you can still be doing work in research, even at a Ph.D. level or beyond, without having such independence and drive, but instead being a "super-technician" following somebody else's agenda and leadership.

The scientific ideal holds that every scientist should be of the primary investigator type, and Ph.D. programs are typically designed to select for and cultivate this.  That said, in practice it depends a lot on the group that you are in.  Some professors expect their students to develop their own research agendas very strongly, others are (whether they admit it or even realize it) more looking for good technicians to execute on their grants, and a Ph.D. is more of a byproduct.

We don't really like to admit this as a community, but with the current market structure of academia, we actually need to have the second type of education and people as well.  Look at it from the perspective of simple flux balance analysis: the rate of Ph.D. students entering programs is far higher than the rate at which primary investigators retire or die.  If every Ph.D. student either ultimately ends up as a primary investigator or a "failure," then it means most Ph.D. students are failures.  But I don't think that is actually the case: people who aren't hyper-passionate to the point where it distorts their lives can still succeed just fine in a Ph.D. program and at research, they just are likely to take one of the other tracks besides being a professor or other form of PI.

That said, even if you don't end up going the harrowing road of PI-ship, research work is very hard, and there are a lot of easier and/or more financially rewarding ways to make a living.  To get a Ph.D., you need at least enough passion for the subject to find more value in this difficult and low-paid path than in any of your alternatives.


How do researchers send unsolicited emails asking for feedback on their works? I wonder how a researcher send an unsolicited email to another one asking for feedback to their work. I guess it will be something like this?

Hello Dr. X
To introduce myself, I am Y, in institute Z. I'm sorry if this email is not convenient at this time, but my work about A is highly relevant to your work in B, so I think it will be interesting to you too. If possible, can you take a look at it and tell me what you think? Here is the link: Human interaction with cats
Thank you for your reading, hope you enjoy it.

I wonder if the summary/abstract should be included in the email too, since the principle for asking good question is to show everything you know about it. Maybe it's not necessary, since the title of the link should prove its interestingness nevertheless? I'd like to have your confirm.
I'm also interested in the case where Y has no Z, and the link is just a collection of observations posted in a blog, not a full paper with proper citation and literary review. It is possible that the observations may have been covered in the field, but Y isn't aware of that yet.
I also think that if the link is interesting enough, then putting a tracking method in there is fine too? Even if they finds out, they wouldn't feel insulted either, because they find that the link is indeed interesting.

Related:
• Is it appropriate (as a PhD student) to email other researchers asking about some details in their papers?
• Is it appropriate to drop by another university's professor's lecture to talk about research afterwards?
• What are the strategies for getting feedback on articles?

The real answer is that they don't. I'm sorry, but I can't slice it any other way. You would need all the planets to align in order to receive an answer after such an email. You are asking someone who doesn't know you and who is probably very busy (like all academics) to provide you a big favor for nothing in return. Because let's be honest, giving feedback on someone else's work is taxing. The best case scenario is that you get very vague and superficial feedback about the first page of your paper.

Instead, ask your colleagues, or people you have already built a rapport with (an advisor or former advisor, a collaborator...). Or do it the hard way and submit it for publication. You will get (anonymous) feedback. But make sure first that your paper is close to being ready for publication, because you don't want a desk rejection, and you don't want to be known as that person who wastes referees' time by submitting drafts.


How should I respond to a reviewer comment that I didn't make changes when I did? I received an email from the editor, including a quote from the reviewer saying "I regret to inform you that the authors failed to address the points I raised in my previous review of this manuscript, in this case, any further comments on this manuscript is pointless."

I sent them an email to ask about the point that we failed to address because I made the changes in the manuscript that the reviewer ask for it. The reviewer said that the authors failed to update the reference list. I add 3 more references to support the old one because he said in his review paper that if the authors don't want to omit old references at least can use them together with more recent ones.

This is the reviewer's comments on my original manuscript:

  The references list needs to be updated. There are old references (1980s – 1990s) that can be replaced with more recent ones. Please see below a number of suggested recent papers that can replace old references. If the authors are not willing to omit old references at least can use them together with more recent ones.

And this is his comment after I updated my manuscript:

  Unfortunately, the authors failed to update the reference list, and failed to respond to these comments. There are no changes on the manuscript. Authors should address any comments given by reviewers, in a point-to-point response; even if they do not want to consider the comments or suggestions from reviewers they must address their reasons for not considering these comments and suggestions. Given that there are no changes on the manuscript, and there is no point-to-point response from the authors, this review is pointless. Thank you for given me the opportunity to review this manuscript, I leave the final decision to you, since there is no response from the authors.

Please advise me if there is anything that I should be doing? The other reviewer recommended that my manuscript be accepted "as is."

Treat it as a mistake.

It sounds like the reviewer may be looking at the old version of the manuscript, either due to their own mistake or someone else's.  Alternatively, the reviewer might not have noticed the changes (which sound somewhat minor).

You should assume the reviewer is simply mistaken and respond with that in mind.  Something like:

  Sorry, there seems to be a misunderstanding.  I did indeed update the paper with changes in response to the reviewer's request...

Did you also include a point-by-point response to the reviewer?

From the situation you describe, it sounds like you may not have.  Even if you agree and make the changes, you should still say so, and state what you have done.  For example:

  The references list needs to be updated. There are old references
  (1980s – 1990s) that can be replaced with more recent ones. Please see
  below a number of suggested recent papers that can replace old
  references. If the authors are not willing to omit old references at
  least can use them together with more recent ones.

  We have added several more recent references.  Thanks for the suggested papers.

This should remove the possibility of such a misunderstanding occurring.

If you did not do so initially, include it now when you respond to the reviewer's objection (and I would apologize for not making the changes clear in the first place).


Is it allowed to write a paper using another's framework? I am an undergraduate, and I recently found myself interested in a topic in economics, and there is a famous article, his framework including something like "model, negotiation, uncertainty...etc."
Is it okay to use his framework with my model (improved upon his), to analyze the situations the author mentioned in his paper?

To be clear, I mentioned many times in my paper about using the author's framework, and not only my model is different, I also added quite a lot extensions of my own. Also, I did not copy his words, just the situations he analyzed, for example, the model with uncertainty, the model with negotiation, etc.

But, is it allowed or common to analyze my model using other's framework? (most sections' names in my paper are identical to the original author's paper, for example, I used "model, negotiation, uncertainty...etc." as well.

Of course, as long as you say clearly it's his and don't suggest it is your own. As a tip, make also clear what your part of the framework/model is, and how it differs from the original.


find papers that are based on another paper There is a paper on my field that I like very much(machine vision). I have implemented the solution it proposes and it works well (not flawless obviously).
However this paper was published in 1991.
Is there a way that I can search relevant and more recent papers that use this paper as its basis??  -I mean it is rather easy to the opposite, just check the references, but how about the other way?)

(Talking more specialized jargon, this papers deals with one (of many) ways to implement a machine vision operation. I like this method rather than others, and I would like to find papers that propose improvements to this method-rather than go to other direction)

Google Scholar is a possibility. Another possibility is Web of Science (WoS), if you have access to it. It allows you to access a list of all papers citing the one you are interested in via 'Times Cited' (click on the number). Of course only WoS-indexed sources will be included. On the resulting list you can perform all refinement and sorting actions that WoS allows.


Citing ideas but extending information Imagine the following situation: Mr. Expert writes that it is important to have A,B & C. Dr. Smart writes it is important to have A, Y, Z. As both are using the arguments to lead to different topics, their list is not exhaustive and {A,B,C,Y,Z} do not contradict.

I think all points are important, but I would also like to add that A may be red or blue. Hence I think:

Red and blue A, B, C, Y and Z are important.

But how do I cite them correctly?

Red and blue A, B, C, Y and Z are important [Mr. Expert; Dr. Smart].

This is the only form that doesn't make the sentence contain more citations than actual words. Is this a bad citation style, e.g. might Mr. Expert complain that he never said A should be red or blue or that he thinks Z is completely irrelevant? Or am I just noting that some ideas might be copied from one (or maybe multiple) listed sources?

It seems to me you should simply expand the text to provide the background that "Expert (cite year) has shown that A,B & C are important and Smart (cite year) has shown that A, Y, and Z are important. Based on circumstances I postulate that also Red and Blue A are important along with B, C, X, Y, and Z". I hope you get the point? In other words describe the findings of Expert and Smart and then add your own "hypothesis" or ideaand make it clear that (a) it is your idea and (b) on what you base the idea. It is not clear fom th equestion whether it is a hypothesis to be tested or a result of your own research. Depending on which the way you present things will be slightly different, of course.


Undergraduate student academic CV I am an undergraduate student and I am writing my CV which I am going to send to my professor for a position as a junior researcher. My questions are:

How should I present my education (including the bachelor that I am going to finish in a year) ?
I am currently doing my thesis which I am going to finish in 6 months. How should I present it given that I haven't finished it yet ?

This is how I usually see students present education and work in progress:

  Bachelor of Science, expected December 2019

  University of State

  Major: Physics

  Senior Thesis: "Reflection of bivariate light distributions" (Expected completion July 2019).
  Major GPA 3.78/4.00

  Minor: Greek History

Using the "expected" tag is usually an indicator that the work/degree is not yet completed, but is in progress. If the project lead has further questions he/she can ask you about your work in more detail. They likely are perfectly aware that you have not completed everything for the degree. People apply for jobs all the time under the premise of expected education/projects.