Does an economics degree qualify for the 17 month OPT extension? (This question is about US work authorization for foreign students.)

The list of STEM fields which will permit one to get a 17 month OPT extension include only two fields that containing the word "economics".

45.0603 Econometrics and Quantitative Economics
51.2007 Pharmacoeconomics/Pharmaceutical Economics

The latter is definitely not applicable to me, so I am interested only in the former.

According to this page, "45.0603 Econometrics and Quantitative Economics" is defined to be

  A program that focuses on the systematic study of mathematical and statistical analysis of economic phenomena and problems. Includes instruction in economic statistics, optimization theory, cost/benefit analysis, price theory, economic modeling, and economic forecasting and evaluation.

My question is: If my diploma says simply that I have a degree in economics (as is often the case with degrees in economics), would I automatically qualify for the 17 month OPT extension? If not, is there any way I could go about proving that I satisfy the above definition? (It seems to me that any decent degree in economics would arguably satisfy the above definition.)

CIP codes in economics include:

45.0601) Economics, General.

45.0602) Applied Economics.

45.0603) Econometrics and Quantitative Economics.

45.0604) Development Economics and International Development.

45.0605) International Economics.

45.0699) Economics, Other.

Your registrar's office should be able to tell you what the CIP code is for the degree program that you're in.  I would expect the list that you have referenced to include other codes if they were approved for OPT.


Relevance of Advanced Placement courses to graduate admissions So a lot of websites recommend taking AP courses and earning college credits in advance. What exactly are advanced placement courses and where can one take them ? Why are they stressed upon; are they really all that important a factor while considering students for admission to a Master's program?

As mentioned in the comments above, the Advanced Placement (AP) program offers students the opportunity to earn college credits for courses completed during high school by successfully passing an exam of difficult comparable to that of a college course.

Directly, AP courses do not influence graduate admissions, since they are generally excluded from cumulative averages. However, they indirectly can influence master's and PhD admissions, because the ability to place out of lower-level courses can open up the possibility to complete more advanced courses in a given discipline, or allow for enough "freedom" in the course plan to allow time for graduate-level coursework. For example, I had sufficient AP credits to opt out of a number of courses as an undergraduate; as a result of this, I was able to take three different graduate-level courses plus an advanced undergraduate math elective that otherwise I would not have had time for.


How to respond to a reviewer request for "pictures of a real experiment" when my paper doesn't have experiments? One of my reviewers put a comment to my paper as "Show pictures of a real experimental test.". However, my paper describes a machine learning technique in electrical engineering.  I don't have any real experiments and I don't claim anything in the paper about that. I can not provide any result regarding the real experiment. The other comments are good and I worry about this comment. Could you help me to provide a response for that?

There are two obvious possibilities here.

The review says only irrelevant things.  In that case, simply respond to the editor: "I was unable to determine the relationship between the comments of Reviewer 1 and the submitted manuscript.  Clarification would be appreciated."  The editor will conclude the referee did not read the paper and the review will be ignored.

The review is unclear due to sloppy writing or limited English skills.  In that case, I would interpret the comment as "Add a graph displaying evidence that the paper is correct."  The response would be "We have added a graph displaying y as a function of x, which supports our conclusion that ..."

Also, when you are a peer reviewer, try not to give vague feedback.


Doing research toward a Ph.D. degree versus doing research for commercial purposes What is the difference between doing research toward a Ph.D. degree and doing research for developing a new product or technology for commercial purposes?
Can those two purposes of research proceed together hand in hand from the beginning of the research?

(computer science perspective here)
Research in grad school differs from industrial research in a few key ways. First, research in academia can be more abstract - you can focus on fundamental research and not feel pressured to produce, say, a working prototype or a product.
Second, the type of research you can conduct is dictated by company needs: if your company is interested in deep learning then you're gonna work on that even if you're really interested in graph theory.
Third, since companies have an incentive to provide products, you may be under more pressure to produce within tighter timeframes.
Finally, often enough companies limit your capacity to publish results due to confidentiality/company interests. Companies won't like it if you publish results on a new method for competitors to use (you may not publish anything for years if you sign an NDA), or publish things that present the company in a negative light (Timnit Gebru's ousting from Google is a notable recent example of such a conflict).
There are of course exceptions. Some industrial research divisions offer more academic freedom, but even then you are expected to contribute to the company's bottom line (which is not unreasonable in my opinion).
That said, companies have a clear advantage when it comes to access to resources. Generally speaking, academia simply cannot compete with the resources and datasets that tech giants such as Google/Amazon/Facebook/Intel/IBM have at their disposal (I don't know enough about other fields, e.g. how the NIH compares to big Pharmaceutical companies).


phd advisor hasn't kept a promise (and may not care) - do I address this directly? if so, how best to do that? My doctoral advisor did something that seems odd to me. I did a bunch of unpaid work for him, with an explicit promise from him (but not in writing because I trusted he would keep the promise) that in exchange he would do one of two mentoring-type things for me, and he has now reneged on his promise.

I want to think he is just unaware of how much time I put in, or has forgotten his promise, or is extremely busy with other commitments, or that maybe my work wasn't up to snuff and his earlier very positive evaluation of the work didn't match what he in fact thought. It may also be the case that the mentoring-type things I want from him would take more commitment from him than he realized he was prepared to offer. I fear that it is a little of some of those things, but also that he is being covertly aggressive (because I feel fairly sure he's been covertly aggressive toward me before).

What would the professors on this site suggest I do? What I want to do is send him an email politely reminding him of our deal and specifying what work I've done to gently nudge him to do his part. (And also to say, hey, if there's some unnamed conflict we need to address, and that's why you're reneging, let's.) Then again, I need him to be on my side so that I can graduate, I don't need him to do what he promised to graduate (although it would really help my scholarly development, hence the unpaid work I did), and I fear this action from me will prompt aggression from him. For example, I'm afraid he'll just say, 'Sure, I'll do what I promised,' and then will hurt me in the process again (since they involve him mentoring, which would involve more work from me and from him). I guess my question is, do I 1) send a polite email,  2) try to set up a friendly phone call, or 3) forget about it and eat a crap-ton of nachos, because that's the only satisfaction I'll really get? I can't switch advisors. Thanks!

I would not assume malice or intent when just plain forgetfulness is likely. There are times in academia where all you are thinking about is the "next thing". Finish the revision for this manuscript, proposal deadline due in three days, grant proposal due date coming this Friday, a consulting client is demanding another meeting, classes have started and you still need to organize and revise your course based on feedback from last semester, etc, etc, etc.

In short, the scholar might just have forgotten. If I were in their case, I would probably be a little embarrassed at my own forgetfulness, apologize, and then put a meeting (and reminder) in my outlook calendar.

My suggestion is send a polite email with a reminder. Just a

Hi Dr. So and So,

I worked for you in ____ project. We had discussed setting up a meeting for you helping me with _____. I wanted to see if you had time to meet now? If you are able, I can schedule a call about it.

Thanks,

Bleepgloop

I think this is a nice little reminder email that is not accusatory and would probably work well.


How narrow or broad should I look for undergraduate research? I'm currently an American sophomore undergrad and I'm looking into research opportunities at the moment. My problem is that the area of mathematics that interests me the most is mathematical logic and set theory, and even more specifically inconsistent mathematics, but there appear to be no opportunities for undergraduate research in this field. I'm unsure what to do or what would be the most helpful choices for me at this point. I know my college recommends cold-emailing professors if I have trouble finding something, but I'm also worried that I'm narrowing my search down too much. So should broaden my search first, just go ahead and start writing emails, or do both at the same time?

I suggest you greatly broaden your search.  There are common features to all research.  Perhaps even look at research projects and programs in adjacent areas, like combinatorial research in computer science.
Since you could easily wait until the following summer to get involved in a research project, you can write programs and professors (in the area, or where you might want to visit) and ask about what you might do to prepare for the projects that exists.  If you do not know computer programming, perhaps that is a gap needing a fill.
It would be good to be exposed to many areas of mathematics before you decide on what you focus upon in graduate school.  I was convinced I wanted to to algebra when I was an undergraduate, but then topology started to be appealing.  In graduate school I switched to analysis.  Now I mostly do applied math research related to physics.


Academic Positions in Physics/Astronomy EDIT/TLDR: Professorships are hard to find so I’ve never expected one. With recent PhD admissions success, is becoming a university/liberal arts professor now realistic and how can I best meet that goal?

I was recently accepted into an astronomy PhD. To give a rough characterization it is ranked in the US top 10-20 for physics/astronomy, whatever that’s worth. My new department paints an optimistic future picture but I wanted to get an objective view. With this prior, what can I expect in terms of career outlook?

From my undergrad experience in physics as a TA+RA I love to teach and research, and want to do both as a job whether that is at a research university or liberal arts college. I would also be grateful to teach at a community college, slightly more so than being a staff scientist at an observatory, but would still prefer to get the chance to research as well.

My undergrad productivity was pretty good - I was able to turn all my projects into publications, so hopefully I can build up from that. What other steps should I take to improve my chances to become a professor, especially at liberal arts colleges? Should I try to TA beyond my second year?

With recent PhD admissions success, is becoming a university/liberal arts professor now realistic?

First, you should not expect to get accurate advice about this.  As a new graduate student, you are at least seven years away from being competitive for a faculty position.  Nobody can predict the job market seven years ahead.

Currently, faculty positions in physics are extremely competitive.  There are many massively qualified candidates for very few positions.  Often, new assistant professors have more publications than the retirees they replace.

Owing to falling birth rates, there are too many colleges in many parts of the world.  As a result, some will fail financially before you finish your PhD.  Private liberal arts colleges that do not have endowments will be the first to go.  During the current pandemic, enrollment may fall 20%, which is fatal to many institutions if they are not bailed out by the government.

Community college hiring is also competitive.  It has different practices from research universities, but do not listen to anyone who tells you that if it's not elite you can easily get a job there.

  What other steps should I take to improve my chances to become a professor, especially at liberal arts colleges?

For any institution, publish a lot.  The number of publications you need to get a job keeps going up.  Physics research is really expensive.  If you want to have a choice of employers, you need to learn to do research that is really cheap.  A good research university lab has a budget well into the six figures, but you are likely to get an annual budget in the low three figures when you are an assistant professor.  It might be zero.  For liberal arts colleges, it is essential to include undergraduate students in your research.  Start supervising student projects as early as possible.

  Should I try to TA beyond my second year?

In my opinion, this is irrelevant unless you learn something about teaching by doing it.  If you are TAing for someone who does not know how to teach, you are wasting your time.  If your university has excellent TA training, take it.  Seek to teach a whole course by yourself.


Do school-wide holidays count against personal vacation time? I keep hearing different things from different people and it seems there is no clear policy laid out at my institution regarding the definition of graduate student vacation days; I'm curious how PIs and students handle this issue at other places.

At your institution, do University-wide holidays (such as "Spring Break" or "Winter Recess / Christmas holiday") count towards a graduate student's two weeks vacation?  I always thought the expectation was just that you should be working most of the time, regardless of what day it is, and that seems reasonable to me as long as students have flexibility to take leave when they want/need to without somebody nagging them about the specifics of when/how much time off.

However, recently there's been the assertion by certain bean-counting PIs in my department that students should be working 6 days a week (including nights) and only taking 2 weeks of leave in total (including major holidays).  Most people probably work about this much anyway, but being told that it's required leaves a bad taste in my mouth.  If people want to get really specific about the "number" of days worked/not-worked, there should be a more standard definition of what comprises a work day (i.e. 9-5, not 9am-12pm).  Am I way out of line here?

This is not meant to be an official opinion, since obviously the rules depend on the local labor laws.

We should distinguish school holidays—days on which classes are cancelled—from official holidays, on which the university offices are closed.
A graduate student not working on a school holiday would be counted as taking leave; however, when the university is closed, that is not normally expected to be a working day for anyone, and thus students would not use a vacation day in such a case.
Advisors should not have policies in place that expect students to be regularly working six days a week, particularly since that would mean that they are potentially in violation of a whole bunch of labor rules.

Given that information, my personal opinion is that research cannot be done according to a timecard. There will be days when you go into the office and figuratively spin your wheels all day, and there are days where you are firing on all cylinders and getting tons done. In my own group, so long as someone:

is prompt in answering requests,
attends group functions,
lets me know if he or she will be out of the office for extended periods, and
is getting his or her work done,

then I will let that person work in whatever manner is most conducive to getting the job done. That's more important to me than knowing they clocked in 8 hours per workday.


Serving your country while in academia, or before going into academia I am a 3rd year mathematics undergraduate(see my math se account), and I think I am well positioned to go into academia, and I am willing to do anything to make it happen.

I also have a desire to show my love for America, and I can't think of any unequivocal of doing this other than joining the military.

Many of my competitive advantages have come from completing certain milestones before a certain age(i.e. finishing the trigonometry books that Ramanujan used at the age he did them, BC calc in 8th grade, a competitive REU program Freshman year, going straight to the graduate courses in my undergrad).  Thus getting deployed to active duty might break this string.

Has anyone had any experience in this matter?

I am not, of course interested in industry, at all.  I would sooner do math on the streets than go into any other job where I cannot continue what I am doing 24/7.

I think you should really consider what you are willing to do in the military.  Are you going to enlist or apply to OCS?  What is your desired MOS?  If you want to join the military while continuing in academics, this is very field specific.  For example, the Navy/Army/Air Force employs a number of medical physicists and will pay for their masters degrees.  You need to specify exactly what your goal would be while in the military.

"I am not, of course interested in industry, at all. I would sooner do math on the streets than go into any other job where I cannot continue what I am doing 24/7."

If you join the military, you will almost absolutely break your 'string' of math achievements.

"the wars that are fought are antithetical to my conception of American values"

If you are enlisting and you branch infantry, what will you do?  If you become an armor officer, what will you do?

All academics aspire to 'serve' humanity in their own way.  Research pushes mankind forward, not nations.


Change of affiliation after acceptance of a paper? I will change my affiliation from University X to University Y in mid February, and I have got a paper accepted just before I move. The proofs will be sent back to the journal just a week before I change my affiliation.
Is it valid to use my new affiliation in the paper? This would be useful as it will count towards my publications in my new institution.
I have already signed a contract and will receive my new email address soon, however, my start date in my new affiliation is just a week after I submit the final version of the accepted paper.

Different journals may have different rules, however, in general:
Affiliations indicate where the work was done (to be precise, where a (co-)author has been working while doing the work presented in the paper).
If you change institutes while working on a paper (including writing up and revising) you should enter both affiliations. When you are affiliated to multiple institutes while working on a paper (simultaneously), add both as well.
However, in a case like yours, assuming that the paper is now accepted (no more revisions), only the old affiliation should be added (unless your journal of choice suggests something else). No work has been done while you are working in the new position.


How should I share (cite) my datasets and R analysis/code files in my thesis? I'm trying to follow some of the best practices of the "open science" movement. In my thesis, I've performed all of the analyses in R (a non-proprietary, open-source program for analyzing data), and my datasets are in the non-proprietary CSV format.

I would like to be as transparent as possible, by sharing my datasets and R analysis/code files with my thesis committee, and ultimately with the public once my thesis is finalized and placed in a repository. How can I best do this?

I was thinking about uploading my files to the Open Science Framework (http://osf.io) and citing them with a regular HTTPS link. Once my thesis is finalized, I would then "freeze" them on the OSF website (as I understand, this would prevent post-hoc changes), then get a DOI that points to the frozen files and cite that.

Are there any better options?

First, best compliments for your intent on open and reproducible research!

Your code and datasets ought to bring you better visibility for your research. GitHub is a good alternative to publish your code. If your datasets involve elements of machine learning you may donate it to the UCI Machine Learning Repository.


Conducting a systematic literature review and paywalls I am writing a systematic literature review but I was wondering how to handle  papers which fit the inclusion criteria but are hidden behind paywalls.

Is it ok to exclude them and state as an exclusion criterion in the methodology section "works that are not freely available are excluded."? Also some papers are accessible from my University without me noticing the paywall so should I rewrite the criterion to "... that are not freely available or included in the authors university contract"?

I don't think that either of these strategies is likely to be appreciated much by reviewers.

Very few papers are actually entirely unobtainable to researchers. Most papers are either part of a university subscription, available as preprint from e.g., the author's website, or at the very least most authors forward you a preprint on personal request via mail. The purpose of a scientific review is to review, to the largest extend possible, everything that is out there.

Limiting yourself to only Open Access material, while morally commendable, means that you are not surveying the state of research, but only the state of what's available easily. This will make your literature review significantly less appealing to reviewers.

Further, I would definitely not go for

  Also some papers are accessible from my University without me noticing the paywall so should I rewrite the criterion to "... that are not freely available or included in the authors university contract"?

That just seems like a lazy excuse for not finding out what licence the used papers fall under. Even if the paywall is hidden to you, you can certainly figure out whether the paper would be available without subscription.


In the mathematical sciences, how much advisor contribution is expected on joint papers? I'm a PhD student in the math sciences.  I've written a few papers, each officially coauthored with my advisor, although essentially all of the research and writing was my own.  The story is the same for my advisors' other students; they regularly coauthor papers with my advisor on which all the work was theirs.

We are all unsure how we should feel about this.  On one hand, we regularly hear stories from other students about their advisor chipping in on projects, or encouraging them to write solo if unable, and we would all appreciate this sort of freedom, guidance, and help.  On the other hand, we all recognize that we are paid out of our advisor's grants, and we don't want to appear ungrateful or unprofessional.

I guess my question is: are we being taken advantage of, or is this a fairly standard feature of advisor/advisee relationships that we should just accept?

We've all tried to casually broach the topic of when coauthorship is expected or when solo authorship is okay, but we've mostly been met by blank stares and awkward subject changes.

I disagree with the given answer by Buzz in a few ways, especially since it does not address one decisive part of the question:

  We've all tried to casually broach the topic of when coauthorship is expected or when solo authorship is okay, but we've mostly been met by blank stares and awkward subject changes.

If there is a justification for the advisor being included as an author, then why has it not been brought up by said advisor when being confronted by his students? It would perhaps be understandable if the author just didn't pick up on the subtle clues his students were giving him, but that does not seem to be the case as per the indications of 'awkward subject changes' and 'blank stares'. It seems that the advisor is simply trying to avoid talking about the issue. Why would he do that? It certainly indicates that something fishy may be going on here.

Then, the other answer asserts that nobody is less impressed by a student who always has her advisor as a co-author*. This is verifiably wrong, which you can prove, being a mathematician, by "contradiction": if nobody is less impressed by a student who publishes papers of a certain quality with her advisor, then a direct implication is that nobody is impressed more by a student who publishes papers of an equivalent quality independently of her advisor. This is wrong. It shows great promise to be able to do independent research as a young student.

But I hesitate to even make that point. This should not be about recognition but about a matter of principle: if your advisor did not contribute to the research (either through substantial amounts of guidance or by actively doing it) or the writing, your advisor is not an author of the resulting paper, and making him one is a direct lie.

In your situation, judging by your post, it seems clear that the students are doing all of the work (in fact, that's a direct quote from your post). If true, you should be worried, both by the ethical issues that exist if you continue this practice, and the potential aftermath (e.g, in regards to your relationship with your advisor) if you decide to take this further (which you should, but that's just an opinion).

Note that all of this is entirely dependent on the assumption that what's going on here is not normal. If it is, if advisors are usually co-authors on all their student's papers despite no contribution, if that is understood by everyone, then you are not lying, you will get all the recognition, and there's really no issue at all ... but how are you supposed to know whether this is normal in your field or cultural domain? We cannot really answer that for you without a bit more information. But your advisor can ... and this brings us full circle: why is the advisor not willing to explain to you whether this is normal?

*.. I now realize that I may have misread the other answer. It's not quite clear whether by "work" they meant "effort" or "actual quality of the mathematical content". Clearly, I took it to mean the former.


How to introduce a "general" area into discussion section I am presently writing up a PhD with a very imminent deadline (next week!), so please go fairly easy. My thesis is of a technical nature.

In each chapter I have a results subsection which is divided into subsubsections (I'm using Lyx/Latex) for each topic within that chapter.
For example, I vary a bunch of parameters within a chapter, and have a results subsection for each parameter.
This is mirrored in the discussion section; within each discussion subsection I have subsubsections for each relevant result.

This has resulted in my discussion subsections being essentially more elaborate versions of the results subsections.

I'd like to have a more general area within each discussion subsection - after the individual subsubsections - that can discuss things more cohesively.

I'm not sure the best way to do this - another subsubsection for "General Discussion" is a little clunky. I don't have time to rewrite everything so am looking for a solution that I can add rather than rework.

This may simply be a question of finding an appropriate subsubsection name, or perhaps there are better ways to divide my discussion up without formalising it into subsubsections. I was thinking perhaps I could use some kind of break - like a few lines of empty space after the last subsubsection, any ideas would be very well received.

E.g. I have this:

Chapter N
- Methodology
- Results
* Variation of X
* Variation of Y
- Discussion
* Variation of X
* Variation of Y
* ?? How to discuss results of both X and Y

The word "Summary" comes to my mind for the subsection heading under Discussion to combine the results of "Variation of X" and "Variation of Y" to present a cohesive argument on your parametric studies.


How can I find journals in my field that do not charge author fees? I am in search of an algorithms journal that does not ask for publication fee.
It doesn't matter to me whether it is an open-access journal or not.
I have been searching for journals with no publication charges journal for a while, but have been unable to find any such journals.

Are there any resources that can help me locate journals that do not charge authors publication fees?

You can use websites like DOAJ.org to search for relevant open access journals that do not charge publication fees.

This example query for 'algorithms' reveals 40 such cost-free open access journals, some of which may be relevant to you, depending on what exact type of algorithm you're publishing.

Using this I found The Electronic Journal of Combinatorics & Image Processing Online (IPOL Journal) which both look like reputable, high-quality, publication-fee-free, algorithm-relevant journals to me.

Some of the information is a little out of date though, for instance the journal Algorithms (MDPI) I think now charges 300 CHF (Swiss Francs) although initially it was free, in the past.


Can re-take exams be changed after submission? I recently took a final which 97% of the class failed. I want to take this issue to the higher ups as there were many issues with the exam, such as including topics not covered in class. My question is how does the process of submitting exams by professors work? If both the main exams and retakes are submitted in one go, it seems like there is little hope to adjust the retake exam to more realistic standards. I am wondering if I can do anything to help me and my classmates in this situation.

As stated in the comments this varies widely based on where you are.  I'm going to assume that in your institution professor's exams are NOT subject to a significant review process.  "Significant" in this context means that the instructor is free to ignore the review, not that reviews don't happen.  As an example, I recently taught in a university where I was required to submit my exam for a check by a faculty member with similar skillset, to make sure that the exam is appropriate for the course.  In that institution I'd say that a "significant" review took place, since I was not really free to ignore the review.
In a case where such reviews are either optional or don't happen at all, the instructor will write the exam, give it, and grade it without much interference from anyone else, if there is any at all.  An exam with a 97% failure rate is exceptional in many programs, but perhaps not all.  I can speak only to engineering in Canada, and such a failure rate would absolutely raise questions.
The process depends on your school but usually there is a formal process of review.  This typically involves speaking to the person in charge of the program that offered the course you were taking.  If this was a course in your own faculty, then usually you'd have a chair of undergraduate education, or an "academic administrator" or something like that.  They would be the first person I'd talk to.
However, you will need to be sure that your evidence and requests are reasonable.  The best way to do this would be to state clearly and with solid evidence why this exam was not fairly written, and why a 97% failure rate does not reflect student learning.  The onus is on you here.  As an example, I hear students say "XYZ was never taught, why is it on the exam" so frequently but it is rarely true.  It may be the case that you missed it, or that you didn't understand the implications of something that was said, but that's different.
For each of the perceived issues you have with the exam, you will need to clearly find evidence that it is in fact an issue with the exam and not your understanding.  You will also probably need to drop some things because they aren't valid.  For instance, "the exam wasn't like the homework" is not valid.  "We were examined on topic X, but the syllabus explicitly states that X is not part of the course" is valid.


Potential advisor offering to fund visit to lab I'm planning on travelling to another country to meet a potential PhD advisor (we're both in Europe). He has said his lab will cover the expenses.

Is this usual practice? I'm from a country where standard etiquette when offered money (or indeed, anything) in a circumstance like this is to politely refuse the offer multiple times, even when they insist, and then eventually agree while making clear you feel terrible for accepting their money. Agreeing immediately would be seen as extremely rude.

I'm aware it's almost certainly the lab's budget that will be funding my visit and not coming out of the guy's own pocket, but still, I don't really know what to say, a standard thank you still feels bad to me, but maybe that's just from my culture.

I do not think the etiquette you are talking about applies here. You need to go there in order to ensure compatibility between you and your potential future advisor. This is neither a gift nor a present; it it a business related trip and I do not see a reason for not agreeing to this.


Research internships at universities and funding I'm going to graduate next summer from my bachelors. Before pursuing a masters program, I'd like to get to know research groups at different universities. Some universities seem to offer some kind of internship programs but I couldn't find any clear information.

How does it generally work? Can one do 6 months or a year of research at another university between bachelors and masters? Does it cost money and where can one find funding?

It all depends. You can join a summer REU program, where you can get funding. You can go on various websites of professor who may be advertising positions, and contact them. Keep in mind this, sometimes, the particular opportunity that you are looking for may not exist (in your case, 6 months/1 year research at a university, as a non-student). That means that you will have to contact professors (even if that means contacting tens of them), and ask them if they would be willing to consider bringing you on for that long. Obviously, you will need to offer them something, like strong computing skill (which will really distinguish you). As I looked at your profile, it seems like you do have a strong computing skill, and so I would advertise that. Another great option (which I did in my previous life), was join the IT department of a specific academic department, and slowly find the opportunity to network with faculty and let them know regarding your skills. Slowly, you will have the opportunity to possibly engage in research and strengthen your graduate school application. In life, often times you have to make your own opportunity. I wish you the best in your future endeavours.


Special (non-english) character in name. What to do as author? Internationalize or not? In German, as well as in other languages, people have Non-English characters in their names. e.g. ß, the umlauts etc..

I frequently face problems when flying, opening bank accounts, etc., particularly abroad, since replacing the ß with ss changes more more than 25% of my family name as compared to how it's written in my passport.

Obviously it is desirable to write one's name for submissions, the way one's name is written correctly. Can one expect to run into problems, and will sooner or later end up with different publications being published under different spellings of the name, or is it safe to go for the correct spelling?

First of all, always be consistent. Whatever you decide, that is what you will always have to use.

Considering the first point, might be better to strive and use your real name as it is with the non-english characters. You will have less problems in the future to prove your authorship in case questions rise. Complain to systems who do not accept your non-english characters...


Authors' contributions statement to highlight contribution of an undergraduate student Statements of authors' contributions appear to be a standard practice in journal papers from experimental sciences or similar fields. Yet I haven't seen many such examples in mathematics.

I'm wondering if it will be appropriate to have a statement of contributions in a paper (algebraic geometry + some applications) that states the contribution of a coauthor who is my undergraduate student. If yes, will it be strange if the statement only explain the contribution of this student coauthor but not other coauthors?

The intended purpose for such a statement is twofold:

To highlight the real (and nontrivial) contribution of an undergraduate student which may potentially be helpful for this student's career.
To avoid opposition from coauthors who may question listing a student as an author. (EDIT: To avoid opposition from coauthors who may question the actual amount of contribution)

EDIT: One crucial detail was left as it was somewhat subjective. The student's contribution is small but nontrivial in my opinion. It is only a nice-to-have result. This paper can live without it. But I believe it adds some depth to this paper. So the necessity of this student's contribution is debatable. I'd hope to preemptively eliminate this debate --- why argue with someone you'll work with for a long time.

In mathematics, the default assumption is that all authors contributed more or less equally to a project, so the main reason I see to describe individual author's contributions in a mathematics paper is that the authors want to attribute credit of certain aspects of the paper to individual authors.  (This can also be done with appendices by subsets of coauthors.)

It does not make particular sense to me to highlight someone's contributions just because they are a student. You are free to do so if you wish, but it will be weird if you only describe one of the authors' contributions.

  To avoid opposition from coauthors who may question listing a student as an author.

This is completely ridiculous.  I have never heard of any co-author complaining that someone should not be listed as a co-author just because they are a student.


Accessing previous versions of papers in EasyChair EasyChair allows authors and chairs to "replace" previous versions of a submission. Is it possible to access previous versions?

(Context: I'm interested in the extent to which EasyChair supports a review process where papers are revised in the light of reviewers' comments, and reviewers/editors need access to prior versions of papers to check that particular issues have been dealt with.)

In the list of submissions, click on the "information" icon (blue ball with a letter "i" in it) next to the paper title, then you will see a "previous versions" link.


PhD supervisor is not willing to co-supervise? I started my PhD two years ago on a specific problem. The problem is to study a given computer science structure from one specific perspective. My current advisor is an expert in that perspective and I got some results and publications with him.

However, during the last 6 months, I started to worry about my PhD thesis as there are no more room for novel results in that direction (several people tackled it recently). There are still some room for minor results and my advisor urged me to tackle them for my PhD thesis.

I am no longer interested in pursuing that direction and shifted towards the other perspectives of the problem as I believe there are still major results to come out of them. My advisor has no objection on pursuing these directions by myself (at the end he will put his name in whatever comes out of it!). Recently, I took a class with another professor and tackled one of the important directions of the problem as a class project and had incomplete but interesting results. The class professor was very happy with my work and advised me really well during the class semester to start tackling the problem. After couple of months of working, it seems I can really get something nice out of this.

I started to believe that, for my PhD thesis, the best thing is to have the class professor as a co-advisor. This will allow me to put in action and test rigorously several ideas I have in the other direction and make my PhD thesis more valuable.

I spoke with my current supervisor about the co-supervision but he insisted to make it as a collaboration instead of co-supervision. He has good relation with the other professor. And if it matters, I have my own external funding with no financial obligation from the current supervisor.

  What should I do in such case?

EDIT on the collaborator vs co-advisor thing:
Because I had a specific problem and had a class with him (which makes it easy to work on the other direction) and the results were almost ready couple of months later, there was a collaboration. My advisor is not willing to collaborate again and urging me to do the minor results instead of pursuing the other direction. The reason I look for co-supervision is

Consult him in many scientific results I am not good at (neither my current advisor).
No commitment in advance for collaborations/ papers.
co-advisor may suggest a new perspective to the problem instead of accepting/rejecting what me and my advisor suggest.

I think @BobBrown summarized everything that needs to be said.

  Brown's Rule for finishing the Ph.D.: Listen closely to what your
  supervisor tells you to do and do it. You can do the other research
  later.

In detail:

You have some publications from your cooperation with your main supervisor. Excellent.
Publish another paper with your new collaborator, if you have not done already.
Then do another paper (those minor results) with your advisor. Finish everything there is to be done on this direction fast.
Finish PhD.
Do whatever you want afterwards.

This is by far the easiest route to your PhD.


Astrophysics after Aerospace Engineering? I'm a second year aerospace engineering undergraduate student.
I like this course because it might get me to the space industry; but it is not as closely tied to the subject of space sciences as astronomy/astrophysics courses are.

Of course I don't want to abandon my course, so I was wondering how difficult it is to get a graduate degree in astrophysics after I'm done with aerospace. I know I'd be lacking some knowledge but I feel like the trade-off is worth it.

I can consider abandoning my course and going to physics instead, but that's a last resort.

Any advice is highly appreciated. Thank you.

It's doable. Won't be easy, but doable. Get as much background in physics as you can during your undergraduate studies. You probably won't be able to take e.g. Quantum Field Theory, but it doesn't sound like you're aiming for these theoretical branches of astrophysics anyway.
Example from the MIT Physics PhD webpage:

Must I have a degree in physics in order to apply to this graduate program?
Prior to starting their Physics doctoral studies here, our successful applicants generally hold a Bachelor of Science degree in Physics or have taken many Physics classes, if they have majored in another discipline. The most common other majors are astronomy, engineering, mathematics and chemistry. Bachelor of Science degrees may be 3-year or 4-year degrees, depending on the education structure of the country they are in.


Is it worth it to continue thinking about academia? I will try to make this short.

My Ph.D. was in life sciences. I was a part of an "International Ph.D program in life sciences" in Germany. The Ph.D was a nightmare of its own. I had to start the project from zero, there was a strict time limit of 3.5 years to finish. The worst part, after some time I realized that the PI either did not write recommendation letters or wrote bad recommendations for his own people (both Ph.D students and postdocs). At the end, I got my Ph.D, but without publications and, obviously, without recommendations.

I managed to find a "postdoc" position in "no-name" university in Canada, however, it was not a normal "postdoc" as one might expect. At that time, the lab was a mess: high turnover, overworked and demotivated people. Few people had to put extra effort and time to keep that place together. The remuneration was extremely poor. Moreover, foreigners were paid less than Canadians for the same position and, essentially, same job. I barely lasted for 3 years and had to quit and walk away from all results, because my mental and physical health started to collapse. I authored one "book-chapter" as the first author. My name is on some 7 or 8 papers but in the middle, as 5th or 6th author. So these are obviously useless. I cannot expect any recommendation from that place either.

I tried to get another job in a university environment or in bio/tech. I managed to land a half-decent job as a project manager in another small university in Canada. Conditions are much better than before, but my salary is paid by "grant funding" and it is one-year contracts that have to be renewed.

I am in my mid-30. Sometimes I feel that I cannot do this anymore. I cannot make any long-term plans and always feel insecure. I simply tired of this life. I need at least a semblance of stability in my life.
Lately, I looked at some ads for university jobs in Middle East and in Asia. I would take a lower pay, only to have some job stability.
My problem is that everywhere one needs (a) papers and (b) 3 or 4 recommendation letters. I do not see a way to circumvent these requirements.
My problem is that my Ph.D + "postdoc" took good 7 years of my life and it is very difficult for me to accept that all this experience (and suffering) is completely useless.
I understand that I should stop looking at anything academic, but it is very difficult to let go. Any career advice will be appreciated!
P.S. To be clear, I am not trying to complain, I have been desperately seeking any legitimate career advice/mentorship for a very long time. The problem there is none for "life scientists", neither here nor on Reddit! Even in my current position, which technically calls for solid experience in molecular biology, I utilize ~1% of my knowledge/experience in molecular biology. The moment I move out of "life science" arena, I am basically on par with a fresh "college graduate" with regard to skills/experience.
On the other hand, I have been hanging on 1-year contracts last 8 years of my life. I cannot do this forever. Basically, I need to re-invent myself somehow, but I do not know how to do this job-wise, finance-wise etc.

I am a Mathematician now working in Computer Security. Towards the end of my PhD, I gave a lot of thought to the problem you are suffering from right now, even though I enjoyed my PhD (for the most part ;-)). My conclusion was the following, and I think it still applies in your case; To stay in academia, you need to satisfy the following criteria:

You have to fairly evaluate your potential as a researcher, which includes your scientific intuition, the ability to execute on it, and your (social) network. Now deduce from this the potential position you can hope to ultimately land. You need to be ok with having that position for the rest of your life.
You have to be willing and able to go through the process of getting to that position, which I anticipated would include unpleasant post-doc experiences like the one you already mentioned.
Now comes the big one. In fact, you need to not only be "ok" with the position in (1), you need to be so incredibly dead-set on having that position that you are not deterred by the fact that (2) is not even the worst that can happen. You need to be so dead-set on it that you do not fear the possibility to end up in your mid-40s with absolutely no job experience and in a dead end that does not lead to new academic prowess.

The alternative is to get a job in the industry. If you do this, I want to give you one piece of advice: Do not look for a job that requires a lot of the specific subject matter expertise that you acquired as a researcher. Do not look for a job that is "like academia". In short, do not fall prey to a sunk cost fallacy. Instead, look for the job you would have wanted fresh out of college. You have proven that you can learn a difficult thing, you can learn a new difficult thing.
Now, chase that job. Industry jobs have a much higher density than academic jobs, so laying out a career path to your dream industry job is much easier. It might be necessary to first work less perfect jobs, to acquire new skills, or simply because you do not have the experience yet. Nevertheless, there is a much lower chance of just falling off the edge and not having any prospect job at all.
In any case, I sincerely wish you the best of luck.


How long does it take before an academic article can no longer be kept behind a paywall? Just a curiosity: after how many years does publications become public (cannot be kept behind a paywall anymore)?

Strictly speaking, the answer to your question is Never.  Even after the copyright has expired, there is nothing to prevent a journal from keeping articles behind a paywall.  Many journals will make articles open access after a certain amount of time, and after the copyright has expired, other people may freely distribute public domain articles.  However, there are some journals that nonetheless have paywalled archives going back to the nineteenth century.


Citing page numbers of unpublished work The journal I'm writing a paper for has an author-year-like citation style which includes page numbers. For instance: "... by Doe (2018, 58) ..."

I now want to cite unpublished work. The bibliography entry has "To appear in Journal X". The exact issue number and page numbers are unknown. As far as I can see, this means that I can only use imprecise references (only year, no page number) to this article. Or is there another way? The paper I want to cite will appear in a journal that does not number sections.

If there is a preprint version online, and you are certain that what you want is going to appear in the published version, cite the accepted version (to appear etc), but also include a mention of the preprint, where to get it, and where the specific thing you want appears in the preprint. If you know something because the author has shared with you a version of the accepted manuscript it might be worth noting their input, something like "the authors have kindly shared the accepted version of this paper, the relevant material can be found in the preprint version at [address] on page [blah]". It's not as snappy as author-year-page, but it will do what references are supposed to do: point a reader where to find information. Practices like removing titles from bibliographies, compressing not over-long author lists to "Aarons et al" and so on are hold-overs from days when publishing was only on paper, and typesetting was by mechanical means, and expensive. Pixels are cheap. If you have to "break" a rule of citation style to make the citation clear, then that is no crime.

If the publisher allows it, please consider asking the authors politely if they can post a version of the article in some repository at its closest-to-published state (is this in an arXiv-using subject? I can't tell if this is the case from your question). Most publishers have some threshold where they are happy for this to be done, even if only under an embargo. Remember: the literature is for posterity, so if next year someone wants to check their paper after reading yours, it can be available, even if it is not publicly accessible on the open web right now.

Also, there's not much wrong with citing page "n of m" where m is the total number of pages of their article, because people can count, and will infer where in the officially-numbered version you mean.


Contacting potential postdoc advisor in open announcements I am intending to apply for postdoc at an institution. I already am acquainted with the potential adviser (we know each other). I already have contacted him expressing my interest in joining his group. However, the institution calls for regular open announcements for postdoc positions and I am particularly interested to pursue under his supervision only. So he advised in his reply to check for the open announcement. Now the applications are called for and a research proposal is needed to apply. I have made a proposal that is in sync with his area of interest (in which I am interested too).

I am really confused whether it would be wise or even need to email a copy of my research proposal to him, as the institution hires postdoc candidates through a common application procedure. Or is it enough that I just apply via institutional procedures and then send an email informing him that I did ?

Apply via the university system first - most likely you will have to do that for HR to even consider you a candidate. Then, reach out to this person and ask him or her if they can and want to receive a copy of your proposal. Some universities have rules when there is an open announcement regarding what they can receive from candidates and how they receive it (standard email versus the online submission system). Plus, if the person is swamped with work, getting an unsolicited research proposal via email may be overwhelming for him or her and not helpful for you. If he or she wants to work with you and knows that you applied, they can advocate to administration and/or committees about your merit as a candidate.  Good luck!


Does knowing the language of the country of a prospective institution influence admission chances? This question applies to universities in the Netherlands

If a given programme at an institution is being taught in English in full, would I be right in assuming that two otherwise identical applications (or as close as possible), differing only in whether the applicant knew the local language of the country where the institution is based, would also be ranked differently—with the applicant knowing the language being ranked better—despite the programme being listed as English-language without any assumptions of local language knowledge?

I doubt any selector would mark you down because you don't speak the local language on the evaluation sheet. At the same time, I would also assume that it's in the back of the mind of evaluators: After all, succeeding in a place isn't just tied to the language in which classes are taught. Knowing the local language has many other benefits:

You can participate in the coffee conversations of your peer students.
You will have an easier time having a large and supportive social environment.
You will likely be happier. It's hard living in a place where you don't speak the local language: Many otherwise mundane things (registering your residence, getting a driver's license, dealing with visa issues) are all difficult if you don't speak the language; they will eat your time, and they will in the long run also eat at your happiness. You will feel lonely and isolated.

Evaluators know all of this, and it will be on their minds when comparing applications even if there is no specific field on the evaluation sheet.

I'll add one other thing: Universities in Europe are largely funded by taxpayers. It is clear to everyone who works there that that comes with the obligation to educate the next generation of people living in the respective country. They do not necessarily have to come from that country, but it's a loss to the country to educate people who end up not staying in the long run, and someone who doesn't speak the local language isn't likely going to stay.


Can I use a part of figure in my published paper to supplementary information of new paper? I'm researched some material and I want to write two paper to other journals. Can I use a part of figure of first paper to supplementary information of second paper? For example, electrical properties of three samples in a figure of first paper, can I use figure of one sample to supplementary information of second paper? Is it OK to reuse figure with different scale range to supplementary information or main article?

If you think of it as reusing an old figure you avoid self plagiarism simply by citing the original. Perhaps the citation includes "Adapted from...".

But, in changing the scale you might also think of it as a new figure, even if it has the same "shape". Does it convey new information or just restate the old information. You might want to cite the old anyway, just to make things easier for readers needing to go to the old paper.

But, you have an additional issue. If you gave up copyright to the publisher of the old article, you probably need to obtain permission to use the figure in any case (unless it is truly "new"). I doubt that any reputable publisher would deny you permission, but you need to ask to reuse even your own work if you don't hold copyright to it (US perspective - laws vary).


Uncertain graduate study plans due to timing problems with visa and professor's funding I applied for the university of Alberta.Fortunately I have got funding opportunity through my prospective professor's grant. I have applied for a visa expecting to go with the January intake, and waited for 6 months to get the entrance visa. As my visa came late I decided to start in the spring semester (May). I contacted my professor 3 weeks ago (in March) and he said he had a good job for me if I can come by May.

Yesterday, I finally got my visa and thus I contacted him again. My prof told me not to come for the May semester as "I have to give your project to other one since your visa delayed". And it seems he is on a sabbatical leave.
He says he does not have funding for me until September and my funding status will be clarified in 3 months. I already have my visa and I have done all the things that I needed to go. Now I am up in the air.

If I accept that I come in Aug/Sep, how can I make sure that he is going to fund me in 3 months? What he decided devastated my plans for starting my term in May. How can I ask for a guarantee? I think he should assure that he will give me the fund in 3 months since I have been waiting for 1 year now.

+from India and I need an entrance visa.

Why he acts like this?

We cannot know, but there are plausible reasons. Some of my funding is available in the form "use it [in this time period] or lose it." If I have a project like that and a student indicates that it is likely (s)he cannot come, I will give that project to someone else rather than lose the money entirely. Here the prof has to make an educated guess: (s)he wants to avoid the situation you are in, but we have all been let down by students who promised they would come, but at the last moment did not. So apparently your professor made the guess that you would not be able to make it.

  how can my I make sure that the professor will give me fund after 2 months?

If you have a contract, but apparently you didn't have one, so that suggests that you are from a country where it is common to sign such a contract at the very last moment or where funding is not considered a form of employment and thus there is no employment contract. As you can see that is hugely dependent on the local laws and customs. In those cases, the answer is: you cannot be sure. Since we don't know which country you are in, there is little more we can say.


How to describe a previous uncompleted PhD on postdoc applications? I am currently completing a PhD studentship, and I'm aiming to complete by the end of the year. After this, I'm looking for a postdoc position in academia or industry. At the moment I'm working on my CV and applications.

One thing I'm unsure about is how to describe my previous research experience. Specifically, I previously (around 11 years ago) took part in a PhD program, but unfortunately did not complete it.

My question is, how should I describe that time period (4 years) on the CV / applications?

Be honest, call it a PhD studentship, but don't list it on my completed education/qualifications (the implication being that it wasn't completed).
Give a vague position title (e.g. 'scientist') - not technically untrue - and be prepared to answer questions in the interview about what that actually means.
Give a specific position title (e.g. RA) - less honest, but less likely to invite questions.

Which approach would be best? I would prefer not to have to highlight this with potential employers, if possible, but I also don't want to be dishonest on my applications. As a potential employer, which would be the lesser of the evils to you? Would you be more likely to throw out a CV at the shortlisting stage based on a historic uncompleted PhD?

For context, I have other research experience and fairly extensive lab skills. I also have various outputs including (mostly middle authorship) papers, talks and posters and have won competitive prizes and travel awards. I will also hope to publish at least one first author original research paper on my PhD work.

I think this is a non-issue. When I review resumes from new PhDs (note: for non-university research positions, not post-docs), I rarely care about anything that happened prior to grad school. Any of these are likely to be fine. Still, my thoughts....

I think the most elegant way is to omit it completely.

Under education, you can list your completed degrees. As you say, anything impressive that you want to highlight from earlier years can be bullets here.
Then under work experience, you start with the first position after leaving the unsuccessful PhD.

That will take your work history back 8 years and give a reasonable explanation for what you did between undergrad and grad school. No need to account for every single year during that time.

Your option #3 also seems reasonable, though I don't see the upside.

It is perfectly honest -- that was your title, and the technical staff will immediately see what happened (they shouldn't care)
Non-technical "resume screeners", who are more likely to be off-put by this, are less likely to pick up on it
But, this reduces your signal-to-noise ratio (you want your resume to pack a punch, not list irrelevant details), and you won't get many points for transparency.

I see even less upside for option #1, though my analysis is basically the same as for #3.

I would avoid option #2 -- it has the same upsides above, but could be seen as deliberately obfuscating (which is basically true) or trying to oversell.


Is it possible to quit a TVL13 job in probation period? I would like to ask whether it is possible to quit a wissenschaftlicher mitarbeiter job based on a TVL13 contract in the middle of probation period? Or do I have to wait until I finish it?
I have found the law corresponding to the different notice periods after the probation period is over, but I am not sure what is allowed before it is over. If I am not wrong, the employer can fire me without notice during that period.
In this website, I found the following:

until the trial period expires    2 weeks to the end of the month

Is this information reliable? It seems to be referencing the same law, so I'd say yes. But, I would like to double-check.

If you want legal advise, then you need to talk to a lawyer or your union representative. It is a bad idea to trust random people on the internet on such issues.
My experience in Germany is that if you want to leave you don't go through that process. Instead you talk to your supervisor. (S)he will express regret and want to know why, but in the end (s)he will not want to keep someone who wants to leave. So together (with the HR department) you will make a contract that terminates the existing contract at a convenient time for both regardless of the notice periods.


Thesis submitted, but not published – can I put the title on my CV? My thesis was submitted, but not published by the library or online yet.

I would like to put its title on my CV. Is this OK? Or is it kind of risky?

There is no obvious reason why including the title of your thesis in your CV might be risky. Just make sure that all information is presented accurately. If your thesis has been submitted, but not accepted, then say "(submitted)".


What happens if a reviewer finds a fatal flaw in a proof in one's mathematical PhD thesis? This question stems just from curiosity, as my work is not concerned with mathematics.

  What happens if a student doing a PhD in mathematics submits a thesis
  with a proof of some theorem and the reviewer finds fatal flaws in the
  proof?

I don't mean small typos but flaws of greater caliber, whose fixing leads to the conclusion that the conjecture one was convinced of proving is completely wrong, or, if gaping contradictions in the proof are found. Can one obtain a PhD with such a flawed thesis?

I assume that in other areas of research even if some results are proven wrong, the PhD can still be awarded on the basis of other results that are present in one's work.

Note, this question differs from this one as here we assume that the thesis has already been submitted and is under review.

I'm aware of a thesis that unravelled at the oral defense: one examiner found a small error and it turned into a big error that invalided a substantial part of the thesis.  The candidate was required to make major revisions.  (The party scheduled after the defense was promptly cancelled.)

I'm also aware of a thesis that was downright rejected by the external examiner before it reached the oral defense stage.  The candidate also has to make major revisions.

These occurrences are very rare: most programs have various milestones to satisfy before a thesis can be submitted, and these roadbumps are there precisely to avoid this kind of mess (which makes everybody look bad, especially the supervisor and the supervisory committee.)  It's rare but it does happen, and on both occasions the candidate dug in, cleaned up the work, resubmitted some months after and eventually graduated.

(One thesis was in physics, the other in math.)


Can I have multiple research jobs totalling > 1.0 FTE in the United Kingdom? Is it permitted in UK academia to have more than one Research Associate post which totals greater than 1.0 FTE? *. What's the general opinion if no definitive answer is possible.

Obviously 2.0 FTE would be a stretch, but I was thinking more along the lines of 1.2 FTE or 1.3 FTE.

FTE = full-time employment.

Generally in UK academic institutions, you are paid based on your "grade" on the pay scale (for posts up to but not including professor). If you were asking if you would receive more than 1.0 FTE in pay, I believe the answer is no, as you would no longer be on the regular scale. Your pay is based on your post, and the research funding would contribute to the University's costs and overheads, as well as your pay. The HR office would not let you be paid more than you should receive according to their calculations.

If you mean holding more than one Research Associate post, while still receiving the same pay, this depends on your institution. I have many colleagues working on multiple projects simultaneously. They're putting in more than 1.0 FTE of effort. As to their official FTE, I believe thy are officially 1.0 FTE, and they are a Research Associate "for" a given member of staff. Their time is then "unofficially" (for want of a better term) split between multiple projects.

I am sure this will vary between funding sources and institutions, as to what is tolerated/the norm. In this case I reference, however, this is not a case of holding multiple RA posts; rather holding a single post, which works on multiple projects. Since their post is not tied strictly to a single project, the FTE is perhaps not the best metric to gauge them by.


Should I state membership in a professional society in authors' list? I am one of the five authors in a paper about to be submitted.
Some of us stated in the affiliation their membership in a certain chemical society closely related to both the subject of the paper and the target journal itself (electrochemistry). I am member of a different chemical society not really germane to that field.

Should I state my membership in such society ?

It depends on the journal. E.g. In ieee journals it is common practice to add 'member of ieee ...' to the affiliation.

If the journal is the main publication of a society, you should not mention affiliation to a different organization, at least as long as there are no official relations between the both.

If in doubt, send a short question to the editor.


Is it ethical to present the same paper in two different conferences? I want to know if it is ethical to present the same paper in two different conferences, where the conference that is to be held earlier does not publish in it any journal/conference proceedings, while other conference will publish it in a conference proceedings.

The field is mathematics.

The issue is highly field-dependent. In computer science, it's probably still considered highly unethical, but in my field—chemical engineering, where papers are not normally "published"—presenting the same talk in multiple venues is not normally considered a problem. Other fields lie somewhere in between.

I think that, regardless of the ethical dilemma, the issue is that the more likely you are to have overlap between the two audiences who will hear your talk, the less you want to give the same talk—even if it's ethical to do so. At the very least, you should have enough new material in the later talk that it's worth the audience's time to hear the second version if they've already heard it at the first conference.


Post Undergraduate Research I am currently an undergraduate student who has a strong interest in becoming a theoretical physicist. I have applied to 4 physics grad schools this year but it seems that my chances for going to grad school this fall 2021 is dismal; I got rejected from my safety school and a top physics grad school and the remaining ones are also quite tough to get into. I do not think I will be able to make it to the other grad schools. As of now, I have done well in undergrad but my major flaw is that I had zero undergrad physics research experience (I have done two self studies, one a graduate Quantum Mechanics course and another a Mathematical Analysis course, but that's about it). I was about to get a research experience (voluneer) during the summer 2020 but due to the COVID 19 pandemic that got cancelled. Basically, I didn't want to multitask during my undergrad years with courses + research because I didn't want to mess anything up.
Here is what I want to do in graduate school: I want to go into Mathematical Physics, with emphasis on String Theory Methods. My long term goal is to study the very early universe where quantum gravity is important and where all 4 fundamental forces are thought to be unified. For grad school, however, I want to focus on something more concrete, something people see (or can imagine) in their every day lives and so my focus for grad school is string theory methods for condensed matter physics.
What I Did during Undergrad: I am a Physics and Mathematics major (Bachelors of Science with Highest Honors) and I plan to graduate this May 2021 (since I will be finished with my requirements I will have to graduate this May as per my university policy). I have taken the Physics GRE during my junior year.
My Questions
(1) Should I work for a professor in experiment(from my school) (particle physics or condensed matter) from May 2021 - August 2022? I am willing to volunteer with no pay.
(2) Should I work for a professor in theory (from my school) from May 2021 - August 2022?
(3) Should I ask a mathematics professor (from my school) for informal mentorship from May 2021 - August 2022?
(4) Can I apply for an REU or is that too late?

(1) Should I work for a professor in experiment(from my school) (particle physics or condensed matter) from May 2021 - August 2022? I am willing to volunteer with no pay.

(2) Should I work for a professor in theory (from my school) from May 2021 - August 2022?

(3) Should I ask a mathematics professor (from my school) for informal mentorship from May 2021 - August 2022?

It may not matter whether you want to volunteer without pay or not, for two reasons.
First, it may be illegal or at least against policy. There are often laws and rules to protect workers which may include a minimum wage. Students are sometimes an exception, but you are not a student. There are fields where there are job openings and funds to pay post-graduate employees, for example this is common in my own field of neuroscience and in biology more generally (though often people hired for these sorts of jobs already worked as a student in the places they are hired); I do not think the sort of physics you are talking about is one of those, but it's also not my area and others may know better.
Second, mentorship of someone at the undergrad level is a lot of work with little concrete reward. Many professors are willing to put this time and effort in, but they may feel a responsibility to reserve those efforts for students at their institution. It may be difficult to justify spending time on someone not a student when many students are looking for a spot.
I think your opportunities, if they exist, will be rare enough that you need to consider all of them and not narrow it down to one of these three categories.

(4) Can I apply for an REU or is that too late?

I don't know much about REUs but as far as what I do know they require you to be a student pursuing a degree. If you aren't a student anymore you are probably out of luck. They are also highly competitive from what I know.

You want to do research in a highly competitive field without a lot of financial backing. You have very specific and narrow plans, which might help with your motivation but may also close a lot of opportunities for you. I suspect your best bet will be to pursue a masters degree and get some research experience in the process, but this may be expensive. I think you've made an error by not pursuing research earlier if research is what you wanted to do; gathering some experience in research and getting good recommendation letters from advisors would be much more valuable in a grad school application than improved grades in courses by avoiding research entirely. Unfortunately, not much to do about what's in the past.


Is it okay to clarify to a PhD interviewer about a question that I was hesitant to answer then, but am not now? Today, I had a PhD interview and the interviewing professor asked me about my plans after completion of PhD. I clearly stated that I wanted to fund my own startup and setup my own venture, to which he cross-questioned that why do I need a PhD for founding a company. Even though, I tried to to clarify that my venture would be based more on the research that I'm going to do, he seemed a bit unsatisfied with the answer.

Finally, he told me that if I had any queries or had to say anything, then I'm free to mail him regarding this.

My real answer to his question "why do I need a PhD for founding a company" was that "I didn't want my years worth of research work to end up in some corner of an archiving website, where no one is going to take a second glance later. So, I wanted my research to bloom into a company for the public benefit."

But I was extremely hesitant to give this answer to him back then since it could have implied that his work is also in "some corner of an archiving website, where no one is going to take a second glance later" which would be extremely demeaning.

But, now that I think about it, I feel that I should clarify this stating this proper reason in an email which I gave above.

Would it be a wise idea to do this? And if it isn't, is there any other way of putting it to express my idea to him?

All inputs are appreciated.

He is asking you why you need a PhD, he is not asking you why you want to sell your research. So, I think the focus of your response is misplaced; why does it have to be presented in a way that if you're not a CEO + PhD then you're a loser who will spend the life publishing shelf fillers?

Instead of comparing to (you + PhD + company) versus (other + PhD + no company), think (you + No PhD + company) versus (you + PhD + company.)

There are dozens of way you can cast this decision positively without dissing the interviewers:

The vigorous training in scientific thinking will enhance my credentials as a CEO.
I would love to work more closely with the R&D so that I can better tailor my company's strategy.
I love to challenge myself, PhD is a great milestone, a trial for me to hone my grit.
I would love to see my research idea turned into a product that people would love, it's always been my dream.
There is a lack of research perspective in the current industry, I wish to change that.

Generally, try to project the difference between the normal you and a better you, not a better you and the inferior you. Some of the negative comments, as you said, may be hurtful even it's not targeted at anyone but yourself.


Guiding a mentee towards greater independence I am a Master's student who is mentoring a recent graduate through a research project in the same field (of astronomy). He is a very good student, but struggles with one of the realities of being an astronomer - coding. Right now, he is just running code others have written, but despite my strong suggestion that he start learning the language, still asks for my help on even the most elementary of problems. His confidence in using computers is lacking, and if he continues in the field it will become a serious hindrance.

I did provide a very high level of assistance early on, but this was mostly due to a couple of bugs in setting my own code up on his computer. In later stages of this research project, he is going to need to write some basic code of his own, so I feel we're getting to the stage where we need to establish a greater level of independence.

One of the key points of difference between a student and a researcher is that a researcher solves their own problems. It is the job of a mentor and supervisor to assist in that, but I feel that my mentee still feels entitled that I should solve his problems for him (I only solved "his" problems before because a bug in code that I wrote is my responsibility). It's time to start taking a more hands-off approach: I'm happy to give advice on how he might solve a problem, but it's his responsibility to sit down and implement that idea.

How should I approach this problem -  (a) with my mentee, and (b) with our supervising professor (we have the same supervisor)?

Disclaimer: I am a current PhD student and speak from personal experience as one who has guided both masters as well as undergraduate students.

Learning how to code appropriately takes skill, time and confidence (among other things). My strategy for this while mentoring students is as follows:

Develop a small project which will have some significant coding component in it but will still add to the overall project. Lay out the coding expectations and deliverables very clearly. Don't start with something too difficult.
Consider using version control tools (such as git) to manage your mentee's code. Be very clear about what languages/libraries etc. you plan to use and how this code will add to the project.
Lay out a timeline with your mentee with very specific coding expectations.
Achieve each small component with your mentee. Guide (but don't spoonfeed/handhold) your mentee. Make sure that he/she codes everything by him/herself.
Give him/her a small reward. (coffee/sugary thingy/beer) This always makes my students very happy. :)

In my experience, once a mentee has achieved a small project by him/herself, they are usually quick and eager to move onto the next objective. I use this to ramp up the difficulty level slowly but surely.

Regarding the second part of your question, I would definitely keep your supervisor/adviser in the loop regarding this. He/She may have much better suggestions than any that I have to offer here.


Does a survey require an ethical approval? We did a student project - which included a questionnaire and anthropometric measurements. Since it was a student project, and the topic was decided in a short time, we did not take an ethical approval from our institute committee. Our institute doesn't have a  provision for fast track approvals for student projects.

But we took a  written informed consent for each participant. Since we got interesting results (unexpexted) we thought of publishing our study. The institute ethical committe denied a post hoc approval.

Do surveys actually require an ethical approval from a journal point of a view?

Since we have the forms of informed consent, aren't they sufficient?

If none work out, is there a repository for unpublished work like ArXiv  in epidemiology?

The question of what sort of ethical approval is required is a complicated one, depending on the local laws, funding sources, university policies, and journal policies.  I don't think anyone can give a definitive answer without knowing these details.  For example, see these charts for an indication of the rules imposed by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

  Since we have the forms of informed consent, aren't they sufficient?

No.  If ethical review consisted of nothing but saying "be sure to obtain informed consent", then it would be replaced by a simple rule requiring informed consent.  Even that is tricky (what exactly are the risks you need to inform participants of?), and there are other issues for a survey.  For example, are you following best practices to ensure anonymity of survey respondents?

  If none work out, is there a repository for unpublished work like ArXiv in epidemiology?

I don't know, but I can't really imagine the community would look kindly on using such a repository to avoid ethical review.

  The institute ethical committee denied a post hoc approval.

It makes sense for ethics committees to be reluctant to approve research after the fact.  One reason is that it puts a lot of pressure on them to approve research that's not perfect but can no longer be fixed; another reason is that if post hoc approval is an option, it creates an incentive for researchers to skip the initial approval in the hope of forcing it through the process later.


What determines you have learned a (theoretical) subject? My question primarily pertains to advanced/research level mathematics.
I would like to know how you can determine whether you have learned a subject? Of course, you'll never master an entire subject, but at what point you can claim that "I know" functional analysis, algebraic geometry, etc? What determines the boundary of "knowing" and "not knowing" these subject?

This forum might not be the best place to ask this question, but I thought it would be even more inappropriate for MathSX and MathOF (for different reasons).

Update: As mentioned in the comments, "knowing" may have some negative connotations which I did not intend to convey. What I meant is simply that how much you should know about a subject so that you get the confidence to do research?

I asked myself this question a lot during my undergrad - "Did I learn anything here?"

This is how I determined if I have learned a subject:  Can I teach it?

Now, I don't mean can I get certified to teach it, or can I go teach the course in the next semester. If I could sit my parents down and explain to them subject X and have them grasp it then I believe I have learnt it. If you can't inform someone about a subject well enough that they understand it then you cannot possibly understand it.

You could also write a (fake) course outline. Pretend that you would be teaching this subject as a course. Create an outline such as

1). Major point

   A). Sub point

      I). Explain sub point with case x

      II). Explain sub point with case y

B). Sub point

Etc.

This is what I do when I tried to determine if I learned enough about a subject and if I felt as though, for example, on main point 5 sub point B I can't explain it very well or I am even too confused by it to really grasp it - back to the textbook, or google.


Asking for a letter of recommendation from professor that offered me a position I am currently an undergraduate in Computer Science, and I am seriously thinking about getting a PhD (I have to apply next year, and I like to do my homeworks way beforehand).

Last year I worked as an assistant researcher in a group at my university. Everybody was really pleased with my work and they said they would be very happy to have me as their student, including the head of the group (he was also one of the professors of some undergraduate courses).

The problem is, while my School is quite good, and I wouldn't mind at all to pursue my degree in this group, I would like to try other opportunities. This would imply requesting a letter of recommendation from him.

Is there any way to suggest that I want to try to apply somewhere else (quite objectively a better grad school, in a different country) and, if that fails, I would like to stay in his group, without being rude? How would this be perceived?

To your first question, yes.  There's nothing inherently rude about wanting to look for positions elsewhere despite having an offer.  Professors often want to their top students to stay on for graduate work, but these students often go to other, often better, schools (or don't pursue graduate studies) so your situation is completely normal.  Most professors wouldn't be offended by such information.  (There may be some cultures where professors' expectations are different, but not the ones I know about.)

I would suggest a frank discussion where you say that, while you'd be happy to continue your studies under that professor, there are some other schools in other countries you're interested in.  There's no need to tell him now, but if it comes up again, there's no need to withhold it either.  You can also bring it up as a question to see if he has any advice: "Yes, I'll probably apply to the program here, but I'm also thinking about trying to study at XXX--what do you think about that?"


Reverse journal editor search I was wondering if there is a tool that allows to search for journals where a given researcher is one of the editors.

EDIT:
Try Open Editors, a newly published dataset of ca. 480.000 editorial board positions across 6.000 scholarly journals at 17 academic publishers.

OLD ANSWER:
There are no open data* about editorial boards yet.
Thus, research articles that analyze the composition of journals' editorial boards unfortunately collect their data manually. For instance, a paper in 2016 writes at p. 4:

We began with a collection of 605 abbreviated titles of journals
[...]. Crowdworkers from Amazon Mechanical Turk then expanded those
abbreviations into full journal names and collected the individual
editorships associated with each journal.

It has not gotten better since then.
However, there is a reason for optimism as ORCID allows users to list their editorial board positions. Unfortunately, ORCID remains underused; but perhaps in the future its API could offer a greater treasure trove regarding data on journals editors. (The same is true with WikiData).
* Note: By "open data" I mean data that are, inter alia, interoperable, machine-readable, structured - see, for instance, the explanation of "Open Data" at the European Data Portal.


Should I present future research directions in a separate section while writing a scientific paper? Should I present future research directions in a separate section while writing a scientific paper? Or to mention it in its related section?

Anything is Okay. I have seen the future directions in both ways: mostly I found it in the related section, however it is rare in a separate section. So choice is yours. But keep one thing in mind. Your future direction should not be too long unless your presenting results and discussion are enough to be accepted by the reviewers. Otherwise, reviewers of your paper may feel the future directed works are important part in your present paper and may give a comment like "why didn't you conduct same work for this paper?"


Can I quote something directly in a foreign language? I want to include a philosopher's quote in an essay (APA). Is it okay to do so? If yes, how should this be formatted? Should the quote be in italics followed by an English translation in square brackets [ ] ?

Reasons why you might want to include the original:

There are issues related to the precise wording and terms used in the original, which you pick up and elaborate on.
There is no reliable translation available, i.e. no published article contains the quote you would like to refer to. In this case, I would translate the quote myself and add a footnote along the lines of "original text" [source] (translated by this article's author).
Understanding the language the original is in is expected from the reader, e.g. in an article about the particular language. No need to include the translation in that case.

In any other case, I would stick to the translated version solely (and attribute it to its source as usual).


Is it OK to add extra paragraph to a paper during the proof stage? My math paper recently got accepted and I was told that I will be sent a proof soon. It's just four lines I want to add.. is it OK to add it to my paper? It's additional explanation of something, and I would tell the editor about it.

But is it commonly done or done at all?

In general no. There may be some circumstance when it can be necessary but the proofing stage is too late for any substantial changes. The manuscript should be published in the form it has been accepted and it is an authors responsibility to provide a final version of the manuscript which ideally should not require any changes once type-set and provided in the form of a proof. Changes that are acceptable are changes that do not in any way change the science of the paper.

If  any major changes are done to the paper at proofing, the editor will likely decide whether or not these are permissible. What would happen if anyone tries to push substantial changes altering the core science of the paper probably varies, but in the worst case the paper might have to undergo new review.


How can I best prepare myself to keep the option for academia open, after leaving for industry? I will be finishing my PhD soon, and I have a just managed to a get job lined up in industry. I previously received an offer for a postdoc position but for various reasons had to turn it down.
Longer term I would love to be able to return to academia, maybe even build a career straddling the two in some way. But I'm concerned that the door will close on academia if I'm out of it for too long.
While I am working in industry in the next few coming years, what can I do to put myself in the best position to make a return to academia? Obviously things like keeping up to speed with my field is a given, but publishing papers is something that would have to happen outside of a full time job, and that could be a struggle.
The job I'm taking has some indirect relevance to my field and obviously some transferable skills. There is also a small (10%) research component.
I'd love to hear from people who have successfully switched between the two

In Germany there are actually quite a lot of such positions at the so-called Fachhochschulen. To be a professor there, it is actually expected to have worked in Industry for at least 3 years (or so, depending on the state) and share your industry experience for a more applied education of students. Of course, an excellent PhD is also necessary. And usually one needs to have some form of achievements while being in industry; e.g. papers, presentations, patents, rise to leadership positions, cooperations with academia, or similar; such that continued applied reseach can be expected.
This is in addition to the comments of @user2768 and @A rural reader.


Trouble finding good letter writers for math grad school due to switching programs I'm planning to apply to top US grad schools in the fall, and out of all the required documents, I would say that my weakest link would be in the quality of my recommendation letters.
I'm currently planning to ask the following people:

Professor X: I'm doing research with this person in the summer, and we already have a significant result that we are planning to turn into a joint paper. (Subject: discrete math)
Professor Y: I received an A+ in this person's undergraduate analysis course last year, and he offered to write a letter of recommendation to those who received an A+ in his course.

Then, the rest I'm not sure about, I have the following to choose from:

Professor Z: I did a research project with this professor in number theory, but it was more like a reading course. I don't think I left a significant impression on him, since the topic I was reading was fairly elementary in the field.
Manager A: I did an internship under this person at a Big 4 Tech company last summer, and he had high reviews of me, and gave me a returning offer at the end, which I declined.
Postdoc B: I did a research internship with this person in applied computer science (not math heavy) two summers ago, and it culminated in a joint conference publication.

The problem with Manager A and Postdoc B are that they are not professors, and I did not do any pure mathematics with them, which I heard should not be a part of my application package.
I was briefly in engineering. I switched into my current math and computer science program about 1.5 years into my undergraduate degree. I started becoming serious about going to math grad school last summer, after testing the waters with industry.
My GPA is probably among the top 1%, and I have taken most of the upper level undergraduate math courses. I will be taking some graduate level math courses at the same time as my applying to graduate schools in the fall.
I've also been learning more graduate number theory material with a mentor on the side, and will be writing some expository pieces. But again, a graduate mentor cannot write me letters of recommendations.
Of course, if I choose Professor X,Y,Z, then I will have 3 letters, but only one of them will be strong. Should I explain this in my statement of purpose? Can I still fix this situation by working on a more meaningful research project in the fall?

I think X, Y and Z with both X and Y strong will be just fine. Few undergraduates have had enough contact with faculty to generate three strong letters.
The work you did with A and B  will be on your CV and you can discuss it in a cover letter.
Good luck.


Getting into a Bioethics/Philosophy Master's Program I'm situated in Toronto, Ontario, Canada and went to one of the country's top schools for my undergrad (University of Toronto). I have a Honors Bachelor of Arts in Philosophy, Bioethics, and Psychology. I have four publications at the undergraduate level, have edited on an undergraduate journal, and have worked at least one serious research-assistantship (for a Psychology Dissertation; but this was done online and not in a lab).

I also had a pretty low CGPA (it's right between C+ and a B-). On top of that, I had very little contact with my professors (coming from a huge school and being relatively shy). So my problem now is one of reference letters and making my low CGPA look relatively "okay".

Does anyone have any ideas about who I could ask for reference letters for my Masters program in Philosophy or Bioethics? I know that the the person I worked for as a research assistant could help, but I've heard that's a bad idea. I can also ask one of the professors whose class I did really well in. The problem with him is that he probably doesn't remember me very well and I'm afraid his reference letter will come off as dull/"she asked me and I couldn't say no". For instance, he's given me reference letters before and I've never, ever received any interest/contact from the places I applied to. My other option is to get a reference letter from work. I actually work in university administration and the person I would ask has his MD from the Philippines. My concern with this is that the University is a Caribbean one and there's a lot of taboo about non-Western education (that I at least have noticed) here. I have asked previous TA's to no avail.

Does anyone have any suggestions for me?

There are a couple of tricks to getting good LORs.

You can ask more than one person, you know.
Approach the person and ask (by email if you like) whether s/he would feel comfortable writing you a LOR.  If s/he thinks the letter would come out lukewarm, s/he can say something tactful, such as "I think you would do better to ask someone who ... (e.g. knows your work better than I do)
Send the person an unofficial transcript
Give the person an outline of what aspects of you should be emphasized for the particular application

I think the Caribbean is fine; also a reference from your workplace is fine.  Do supplement it with a purely academic one.