How intensive is the process of interviewing people for faculty openings? I'm interested in answers for both the individual faculty member and for the department as a whole.

For the individual prospective faculty member - How long does the prospective faculty member's visit usually take, especially compared with the visit of a prospective PhD student applicant? And does the faculty member go through multiple interviews with individual members of the department? I know that the process varies from department to department, but specific examples would still be helpful.

Edit: This answer applies only to the US.

For me, the typical case seemed to be:

Day 1: Fly in mid-afternoon. Meet your faculty host and 3-4 faculty members for dinner where you have informal discussions about research, the university, or anything else.
Day 2: This is the main day. The day lasts from about 8am until about 6pm. You give your 1 hour talk, interview with about 6 different members of the faculty (sometimes more if the meetings are in groups), have lunch, meet with graduate students, meet with the dean, and meet with the chair.  After 6pm, you usually get taken to dinner with 3-4 more members of the faculty.
Day 3: Sometimes you'll have breakfast with your host, sometimes not.  Then you fly out.

It also wasn't so different for research labs.  Just replace "faculty member" with "research scientist."

I'd say that these visits aren't any longer than a prospective Ph.D. visit, but much more intensive.  Also, Ph.D. students usually visit after being admitted, whereas faculty members visit to interview.


Why physics (science) articles and journals differ pedagogically with books? During the undergraduate, students are introduced to new materials through reading books and lectures. They go through all the semester struggling with solving exercises of different levels. However, when they become new researchers, they face disturbance to familiarize themselves with the journals in concern, i.e., everybody agrees that the researcher should take enough background, even though, the traditional proceedings may not work to dive into a large topic of research that comes up with updates for almost every day. Particularly, reading such articles keeps it fuzzy from what's happening on the ground. In addition, lots of proofs (if we speak in terms of physics) are not clear if not missing. I wonder how this could be solved?

The textbooks that students use are written for novices. Scientific papers reporting research results are written for experts. And not just any experts but domain experts, or even sub-sub-sub-domain experts. So the current situation is probably about as good as it can be. Why?

Not everyone needs to be an expert in a field, but many people need some knowledge of it. So, in schools, students study the basics of things without any attempt to teach them everything. Students get a working knowledge of a lot of things which lets them be successful either in putting those ideas together to solve problems (application) or to go deeper and use further study to become experts (theory).

But you note that the step from novice to expert is a big one.

Think about closing the gap. Should we make school much much harder? Should we make scientists try to explain everything to novices whenever they write? Both of those would be steps backward, I think. The first would mean more failures, the second would slow down the march of science and make scientific papers repetitive so that the beauty of new results gets lost in the chaff.

There are papers (and books) at the intersection, however. Some people prefer to write survey papers in a given field, attempting to bring the general understanding of a sub field more accessible to a general audience. Carl Sagan was good at that sort of thing in astronomy, for example.

However, surveys of a field are only written fairly late, after the discoveries of a field have had time to settle in the minds of the experts, proving their worth. The most important discoveries can take quite a long time to become integrated into the general thinking of experts. Only then do the survey papers make much sense.

But if a novice wants to become an expert it can be a long and hard journey. University education, especially graduate education, is supposed to put a student on a path to expertise. Working on research with an expert advisor is the most common way. But the first few (hundred) scientific papers will be difficult. It becomes easier with practice. But so does riding a bicycle.

Note: Even graduate level textbooks are written for novices, but in a sub-field rather than the overall field. My first look as measure theory was in grad school and, while I had a lot of mathematics experience, I was a novice in that particular subject.


Is there something like withdrawal charges? I have served as a reviewer for allied academies and decided to submit an article myself, but couldn't find any info regarding APCs.
After some months I was told that my article is accepted and I have to pay a huge amouth of 1406 Euros (sorry but I do believe it's an insane amount of money I can't give especially for a journal without an impact factor).
I wrote to the editors and accountant I want to withdraw the manuscript for it is impossible for me to pay (this is more than 2 times my salary), so they asked me how much can I pay, and I honestly answered that so far I have never paid more than 100 USD (my university can not help me in paying the manuscript). So today I have received an email stating: "Following the standard practice of Open Access publishing, an author is obligated to pay the processing charges for the submitted manuscript after acceptance. If you would still decide to withdraw the paper, we request you to bear the expenditure incurred by the publisher. We ensure you that we will retract the Article from Website after processing the withdrawal charges of USD 119$. This is the minimum fee and maximum discount given to the Author."  Sorry but why should I have to pay anything? It's not like they have paid the reviewes (I have never been paid for that)... I really don't understand the situation. If I pay they will withdraw the article if I do't then what? They'll publish it?

Don't pay them a penny/euro

This is a scam.  Cut all ties with this journal/company.  I've never heard of any reputable journal charging thousands (or even hundreds) to publish an article.

In the future google the journal name first.  There is also

https://beallslist.weebly.com/

to help filter out scam publishers.

Rules of thumb for vetting publishers

1) Don't pay to get published.  Journals generally work on a subscription method where subscribers pay administration overhead.

2) If you do have to pay, it should be a conference paper with a date, and location.  Some conferences require that at least one of the paper's authors attend.  Be sure there are a date and city attached.

3) Paper retractions/withdrawals are generally big deals triggered by incompetent or unethical research practices.  Fees associated with this would obviously be a hindrance to accurate reporting by authors.

Edit:
You're not the only person this has happened to.  See https://web.archive.org/web/20130903150917/http://www.jfdp.org/forum/forum_docs/1013jfdp1040_1_032912094346.pdf


Why there is a lack of transparency in US tenure-track job searches? I find it strange that most US departments have so little transparency in tenure-track jobs searches. In the UK the system is a little cleaner. Jobs are generally announced in one place (jobs.ac.uk) and the interview date is often set in advance. In the US there is no central list of jobs and it is difficult to determine where in the process the search is. Why don't search committees set a date for the short list to be decided at the outset and make it publicly available? Even for searches that move sequentially through the short list inviting candidates one at a time for interviews, could still send out a notification. It seems it would reduce the stress of the search for many applicants and not be too much work for the search committee.

There are several factors at work here:

Remember that there are several thousand colleges and universities in the United States. A central database of such jobs would be significantly harder to publicize and organize.
Most universities in the US are private. They are under no such compulsion to post their jobs on any particular web site, unless constrained to do so by the funding sources that are supporting a particular position, or legal requirements to do so. (To my knowledge, there is no such requirement.)
The more deadlines and constraints you build into the cycle, the more pressure you put everyone under—applicants, recommendation writers, support staff, and departmental faculty involved in the search.

So I think there are multiple reasons not to publicize the results of a search, and I think most hiring committees would be reluctant to do so. There could be a better job done of announcing searches, certainly, and that would make things easier (but again, the places that currently advertise would likely complain about losing their business to a central source!).


Is it acceptable if I write a title of a thesis of the same as the title of the co-advisor paper? Can I use the same title for a thesis and a co-advisor paper?

No, I do not think it is generally a good idea to use a title for your work that has already been used before. Main reason would be that it makes it both publications harder to search for, and allows for mistakes. Just come up with a slightly different title of your own.
The only exception I see is for two publications that are in some sense the same work, such as the conference publication,  journal publication, and possible arxiv preprint of one and the same paper. Some discussion can be had here about when it is still "the same paper", since generally these 3 versions will differ somewhat, but that is not relevant to your case.


When addressing academic departmental assistants via email, should I use their first name or just Mr./Ms. X? It seems very common for them to normally prefer being addressed by their first names (since Mr./Ms. seems to be very rarely used in Academia).

My policy : the first time you contact the person, go with Mr. Doe (or Ms. Doe), but sign with your first name. The latter is a signal that you are OK with a "first name email relationship", from this point it will be so most of the time.


Will getting a PhD close doors for working as a software developer? I am trying to decide whether I should continue with a PhD (in a field closely related to computer science) after my MS. I will be finishing my MS soon and have an opportunity to continue for a PhD.

My question is will getting a PhD close doors for working as a software developer? Are the opportunities for PhDs' only based on research? Even after a PhD will I still be able to compete with people with BSs and MSs for Software Engineering positions? Finally, during the PhD will I be able to apply for internships that deal with software development than pure research?

Q: Will getting a PhD close doors for working as a software developer?
A: It depends on the position you are looking for.  Certain employers will not want to hire you because they may have the perception that hiring someone with a PhD will be more expensive than hiring someone with a bachelor's, and if someone with a bachelor's can do the job, they aren't going to want to pay extra for the PhD training.

Q: Are the opportunities for PhDs' only based on research?
A: No, there are a number of PhD graduates who go into industry and end up doing development-focused work.

Q: Even after a PhD will I still be able to compete with people with BSs and MSs for Software Engineering positions?
A: Yes and no.  If the job can be done by someone with a BS or an MS, then companies will not want to pay more to get a PhD to do the job.  On the other hand, there are development-focused positions where a PhD is beneficial.  Having a PhD opens those doors for you.  Some of this will be very dependent on what you spent your PhD doing.  For example, if you spent your PhD developing systems and publishing papers on those systems, that will be much more desirable for companies with software development positions than if you spent time doing non-implementation research.  At some software development companies, having a PhD is considered equal to some amount of experience, so you may enter at a higher position/pay scale than someone with a BS or MS and potentially get promoted more quickly.

Q: Finally, during the PhD will I be able to apply for internships that deal with software development than pure research?
A: Absolutely.  This will be somewhat subject to your advisor, but there are a number of internships for CS graduate students that are very development-centric.

There are a lot of different reasons for getting a PhD, for example, your own personal gratification, to do research, to teach, to get a job that you can't get without a PhD.  The question I think you should ask yourself is, "What do I want to get out of doing a PhD?"

If the answer to that is to make more money/make a bunch of money doing software development, you should stop at your MS and go into industry.  If you are doing it for other reasons (as listed above) then definitely go for it.


Publishing a creative, important result – does it create any real finance opportunities (jobs, etc.) I often fantasize that when I will get my work to successful end, then I will have new possibilities open – and that maybe I will even receive scientific job offers. The work is obtaining new important results in computational sciences.

But then I get to the ground, think that giving someone job is rather a necessity for the employer – and not an act of appreciation or even not an act of support. Then, my results are important and useful, so someone may need them. However, the results can be understood, used and further developed by some other scientist. So it will not be necessarily me, who will get the job.

One related example that comes to my mind is Stephen Wolfram, who is independent because he is earning money himself. So he was not appreciated by someone, instead he won his share in software market.

Sadly, there is not a strict correlation between doing good science and being financially successful. It is entirely possible to do "creative, important work" and still not be well rewarded for it. For instance, one could have published these results in an obscure journal that very few people will read. Or, as another example, the researcher might be a poor "salesman," unable to convince readers and fellow scientists of the merit of his work.

In general, you need a combination of both networking and technical skills to forge a successful career as a researcher: the contacts will help you get interviews for jobs; your technical knowledge will get you the job.


How to ignite your research career when your advisor is so disappointing? How can I ignite my research career when my advisor is so disappointing and I can learn nothing from him?

He rarely publishes academic papers, but he has his fingers in many pies(engineering projects) and has no time to give any suggestions and directions for my MS project. I think nothing can be learnt from him. How can I startup my own research career under such a condition?

As mentioned in the comments, if you are not happy with your advisor, find a new one.

I think there are some misconceptions underlying this question.  Typically graduate students write papers, not faculty members.  Publishing is up to you, not your advisor.  Faculty are typically not trained as managers.  Therefore it is up to you to give yourself direction.  I think you should consider these features important in an advisor:

Can obtain funding you need to complete your research.
Can add to your reputation and connection to other researchers.
Knowledge of the discipline (less important because it's easier to get this elsewhere)

From a faculty member's perspective, the best way to achieve all of these things is to be involved in as many projects as possible.


A time frame for a faculty position application application in UK Let us imagine that I am uploading the application for a faculty position (e.g. lecturer) in a university in UK today. What to expect next? Should I wait for their reply anyway or only in the case that my application is in a short list? How long might it take to get an email from them (weeks, months etc)?
Thanks!

In my experience English[1] universities will notify all applicants shortly after the shortlist has been decided upon, either with a positive or negative response. Moreover, this decision is typically quite fast, around 2weeks - 2months.

[1] I have insufficient experience with Welsh and North-Irish universities, and have applied to Scottish universties and never received a response at all.


my first authorship paper from my PhD was changed at last minute to a co-authorship... is it gonna affect in any way my career? I recently finished my PhD in Developmental Biology in the US, but I left a couple of experiments completed prior to finishing the paper. (This paper was developed during the course of my PhD and has had numerous changes).

I have since finished my PhD and my supervisor started to take my paper and made decisions on it. He never once asked me for my Drosophila collection, and we never ever discussed the paper and how we could finish it.  I became depressed as he treated like I am stupid, even though the paper was almost done and it was worthy of a high-impact journal... He never seemed to trust in my capabilities.

I have since realised that he found a new grad student to finish those experiments (that I could perfectly have done faster and in a much shorter time)... and now (almost a year later) my paper was submitted. Unfortunately, he decided to make the other PhD student the second first co-author of my paper.

I would like to hear some opinions as I don't know what to do.
Is this going to impact my future career?
I also don't understand how someone that knows deep inside that I am the first author of a paper can do this?

The title and body-text of your question do not match. The former describes the change of authorship as "last minute" whilst the latter says that the paper was developed from your drafts "almost a year later".

Also, could you clarify what you mean by "second first co-author"? Is that a euphemism for "second author"?

Anyhow, there is a big difference between:

a complete paper having the authorship order changed unilaterally by the corresponding author at the time of submission (which is what "last minute" would imply); and
a draft paper being developed and completed by a new co-author, who is then given precedence over the person who wrote the original draft (which is what the body of your question implies).

If §1 applies, then the person who acted unilaterally acted improperly (even if the authorship order does warrant change, the change should be done transparently).

If §2 applies, then, based on the information available, the situation amounts to a dispute rather than to misconduct. In some circumstances, it may be perfectly reasonable for a person who turned a draft into a complete paper worthy of publication to take precedence over the person who wrote the draft originally. Without knowing the details of the case, it is difficult to say who is in the right.

Your options:

A) complain to the editor/publisher (be prepared to provide detailed evidence to substantiate your argument, such as the drafts with their original timestamps) -- possible outcomes include nothing happening (if the editor/publisher disagrees with your claims), change of authorship order, addition or removal of co-authors, or retraction of the paper;
B) (may require you to have attempted §C already) complain to the university's research conduct office or equivalent (as with §A, be prepared to provide detailed evidence) -- possible outcomes as per §A, plus possibility of disciplinary action if the university considers serious misconduct to have taken place;
C) complain to the corresponding author (you may want suggest that it was oversight rather than out of malice... it is possible that, with the distance of time, your contribution was forgotten unintentionally) -- possible outcomes as per §A, although if any changes are made to the author list, the corresponding author will then have to convince the editor/publisher that the changes should be made (editors do not permit changes without justification, in order to prevent "gift authorship");
D) engage legal counsel and complain through the courts: IANAL, but a likely argument would be that your moral rights (specifically, the "right of paternity": that is, to be recognised as the creator of a work) were not recognised properly (if, moreover, you have not assigned copyright to the university, you may be able to sue for copyright infringement).


Is it acceptable to take photos of slides at a conferences for private use? Is it accepted/appropriate to take pictures of presentation slides at conferences for private use?

I am not talking about putting those pictures out in the public afterwards, I know this is illegal without consent of the presenter.

Should it matter, I am talking about math conferences.  And I am asking because I don't see anyone taking pictures.

I have seen it done many times, sometimes I would see people recording entire sessions on video. My guess is these are people coming from institutions that cannot afford to send many researchers abroad and the one person sent will pass the material to their colleagues in their home country.

Some conferences explicitly forbid recording presented material. See for example the American Association for Research in Otolaryngology (ARO):

  ARO   does   not   permit   audio   or   photographic recording  of  any  research  data  presented  at  the meeting.

But that rule was not strictly enforced at the meetings I attended. So the answer is: it depends on the venue.


Research institute reluctant to provide recommendation letters. Should I persist asking them? I am applying for a very competitive grant call for PhDs and I need as minimun 3 letter out of a maximun of 4.

I have already 3 from different professors but a 4th would come very handy so I decided to ask for it to my master's thesis supervisor.

He had not replied yet. For 2 weeks approximately.

This kind of questions has been answered here but with a difference, this mail was a first approximation so I don't have any previous agreement with him.

Recently I asked to other professor at the same institution and he has not answered yet either.

I finished the master in a friendly way, is it possible that the institution has decided not to support me?. When I was doing the master thesis I moved onto a different internship because I didn't see much of future prospects at what I was doing neither any salary. Even though I got a grant from that institution to study their master.

I'm applying for these grants with a project deeply involved with what I am working now, but absolutely nothing to do to my previous "research".

Is it a good idea to send a last email or to look for another professor at such entity/another? Deadline is within next week.

Professors are very busy. I wouldn't take "no reply" as "don't want to do it", your email may well be sitting in a folder labeled "look at these later" somewhere...

Send both professors another email, and begin the subject line with "Time sensitive" to get their attention (eg. "Time sensitive: Letter of recommendation"). You might also try calling, although if all you have is an office phone number, many profs are even worse with their office voicemail than they are with emails.

When you email, include your CV, and a separate document with some bullet points about yourself and your achievements (both during your time with them and since your graduation if applicable). The less work they have to do to write the letter for you, the more likely they'll be able to fit it into their busy schedule.

Keep trying -- but do NOT worry too much if you can't get a letter, that does NOT automatically disqualify you. Unlike with a PhD advisor, who only works with a few students and works with them for several years (it would be weird not to get a reference there), a masters' thesis advisor works with many more students and for a shorter period of time, so it's not that unusual to not be able to get a reference (especially if it's been a few years - mine barely remembered me when I contacted him for a reference three years later).


Student supervision when student loses motivation to work I am a professor at an academic institution in applied mathematics. Last year around summer, a Masters student in my research group wanted to switch from his supervisor towards my research interests as he became more interested in my line of work. He displayed enthusiasm during my classes with advanced, interesting questions and by coming to my office hours before mentioning that he would like to switch.

After having an extensive discussion with his supervisor, I decided to take on the student's supervision responsibilities. My student worked well on his research for the first two to three months. Given his level of enthusiasm, I expected him to continue on for a PhD with me. So, I was quite surprised when he mentioned that he wanted to end with just a Masters and not continue on to a PhD. He mentioned that he did not know what he would like to do after his Masters, and that he would just like to focus on writing a good Masters thesis for now.

Since then, I had the impression that he has not been putting in enough work every week. His work has been alright and okay and sometimes mediocre. I had the impression that he might have been working on somethings totally different which is not related to my line of work.

Wondering about his interests to guide him in the right direction, I plan to ask him about his future plans and to ask him to just write an okay thesis and put time in to work toward his future goals, be it a job or further studies. Is this the right thing to do as a supervisor? Is the student being ethical here?

Yes, I think you're doing the right thing.

One of my service assignments is undergraduate advising in computer science at a selective school.  I think my experience with undergrads may inform on what could be happening with your grad student.

All the students I encounter are smart and they're all capable of getting an A in anything if they only took one course, had someone else cooking their meals, doing their laundry and cleaning their bathroom and they actually cared about the subject.

When students don't do well, it's almost always one of two reasons.  The most common is that they don't have the time, usually because they're taking too heavy a load, but sometimes due to medical, family, relationship, work or other reasons.

The second reason is they don't like what they're doing.  Sometimes it was a terrible course delivered by an instructor who did a terrible job.  Sometimes it's on us, but those are rare; academia doesn't run completely open loop.  Those student evals actually do matter.

More often, they've been pushed into CS, often by parents, or they've pushed themselves into it.  And they hate it.  They feel cornered and they want out, but see no way out except to plug ahead somehow and get it over with.  An example might be a student who desperately wants to be an actor but is facing threats from his father that any financial support will end if he switches to a drama major.  Another may have realized the work is different than she expected and not what she wants to do with her life but believes she's sunk too much into the degree to give up now no matter how much she hates it.

A social worker friend of mine once remarked, "People don't make changes in their lives until the pain of staying where they are is greater than the pain of changing."  And in the meantime, they struggle and they don't do well.

I'm suspicious from your description that your student has come to a realization that this just isn't what he wants to do with his life.

When I encounter students that seem to be struggling in this way (which is pretty often with UGs), it's often because they had a plan but it's not working and they don't have a new one.  Asking what their plan is when they don't have one isn't as helpful as encouraging them to think about what makes them happy and what they want from life.  What I've found is helpful is to ask them to watch Steve Jobs's 2005 commencement address at Stanford and discuss with them some advice he gives:  To do great work, you must love what you do.  Don't settle.  Keep looking until you find what you love.  You cannot live someone else's life.


Do anyone related to scientific publishing has experience using EOI's as the identifier for the articles in a journal? I'm part of the editorial committee of a small open access ecology journal that is slowly growing Currently, our journal doesn't have the means to pay for the doi service, but we found this service which offers a different identifier, the EOI. We asked for additional information and some of the claims the state are:
"You will be eligible to get EOI for any number of papers for your publication."
"You need to pay one-time membership charges USD $100..."
"No charges per EOI."
"For DOI you need to pay USD $2 per DOI, which cost really high for journals and membership charges ranges from USD $300 to USD $100000."
"Both these objects serve the same purpose, but in EOI we provide more flexibility & tools will be provided periodically for submission, no charges for errors (will be corrected by Citefactor staff)"
They also list a sample of journals that use their service, which are not necessarily highly recognized, but then it would be also our case.
Is there any other alternative around to have a proper unique identifier for our articles?

I'm Ed Pentz, Executive Director of Crossref. I don't know anything about EOI so can't comment on it. I did want to correct the information you've been provided. Crossref charges annual membership fees from US$275 to US$50,000 but many smaller members join via a Sponsoring Organization and pay much less - please contact a sponsor if there is one in your country. We charge US$1 per current journal article and US$0.15 for older content. Fees for preprints, books and grants are different - full information on membership and fees is available. We have over 13,000 members in 139 countries so are very inclusive. It's not just about the identifier - registering content with Crossref means it's discoverable along with over 114 million other content items. Feel free to email member@crossref.org with any questions.


Branching out into a new research area I'd like to move out of my comfort zone and do research on a topic that I know very little about, but is closely related to topics I have published papers in. Specifically, I have an idea from some of my previous papers that I think can be applied to this new area.

The trouble is, I don't know what the community in this new research area considers interesting. The literature in this new topic is vast, and I don't know anybody who works in this topic.

I have gone to Mathscinet and tried tracking down what seem to be the important papers in the area, and I have cold-emailed people whom I think are the experts in the field for help finding references related to my idea (I have gotten one response, which was very helpful).

Nevertheless, I still feel my understanding of this topic is very shallow. I think my idea, if it works, would be interesting to people in this field, but I am not confident in my ability to connect it to previous work and to explain to the community why they should find it interesting. (I am not concerned with the possibility that my idea has been worked out before, I have reasons to think this is very unlikely)

This is the first time I am venturing this far away from the topics in my PhD thesis, so I am not sure if there is more I can do to familiarize myself with this new field. What do the rest of you do when you are preparing to do work in a new, unfamiliar research topic?

Be sure you read the relevant articles you can find so that you know what has already been done. Then go to the relevant conferences and see if you can talk one of the senior people into giving you 15 minutes for a discussion of your ideas over a cup of coffee -- and if that turns out to be productive, see if they are interested in collaborating in a paper. You will likely do the majority of the work for the paper, but the senior co-author will make sure you stay on the right track, and point you at other papers that you may have missed by yourself. He or she may also introduce you to other researchers in the field who have thought about connections between fields such as the one you have in mind.


How to translate French "colleur"/"khôlleur" position into english? French higher education system is quite singular: besides traditional universities (following Bologna Process scheme with Bachelor (3 years), Master (2 years) and PhD (3 years)), there are so-called grandes écoles – mostly in the business and engineering fields. To enter a grande école, one must traditionally attend classes préparatoires.

One distinctive feature of these classes prépa is the significance of frequent colles (1 every two weeks per student and discipline – sometimes also written khôlles), which generally consist of  1 hour oral examination, where a couple of undergrads solve a problem in front of an examiner – the so-colled colleur.

Colleurs are mostly professors teaching in classe prépa. However they can also be university assistant professors, high-school teachers, PhD-candidates, or post-doc lecturing on their part time.

Question: What is the most appropriate translation of "colleur" into English?

("TA" or "tutor" both seem too broad in my opinion.)

I would suggest using the official title and then adding a brief sentence describing the job duties. This way you provide ask the information in an accurate and accessible way. Having to look up a job title is not a big deal when evaluating foreigners.


Distinguishing "Presentations" and "Experience" in CV for application for Ph.D I'm working on a CV for a Mathematical Sciences Ph.D program. Though I don't have any papers published, I have contributed to a number of research groups and given some hour-long presentations. I also did some presentations as part of my capstone projects in both of my undergraduate majors (math and chemistry). I thus think it's valuable to have a "Presentations" section on my CV for now until I have papers published.

However, some of the info in the "Presentations" section would necessarily overlap with some of the info in my "Employment" section, e.g.:

"Developed and presented an improved C algorithm for [analyzing
simulations for xxx structure] using [mathematical
technique]."
"Presented a literature review on [use of a mathematical technique in
simulation] including a detailed overview to the research
group on [mathematical algorithm used for analysis]."

How can I distinguish the two sections? Should I emphasize the content of the presentation more in the "presentation" section, and my day-to-day routine more in the "employment" section?

Any other suggestions?

How can I distinguish the two sections? Should I emphasize the content of the presentation more in the "presentation" section, and my day-to-day routine more in the "employment" section?

Answer #1) I would distinguish the two sections by calling one, "Presentation Experience". The ability to execute lengthy and quality presentations is a very valuable and rare capability. Not many people can do it well. I consider myself to be a poor presenter and I've personally witnessed people who present worse than I would. By all means, accentuate your presentation experience by providing as much context as possible. Let the reader feel like they can almost "see" the presentation as it took place.

Answer #2) I don't think it's detrimental if there is a little overlap between your job duties and your presentations. Simply don't provide much or any information about your presentations in your job duties section. You might mention that one of your current job duties is to make oral presentations as required/needed.


How to find past editors and editorial board members of scientific journals? Journal websites usually list their present editors and editorial board members.

Is there any systematic way to find out the journals' past editors and editorial board members (if possible, in a large-scale and machine-readable manner)?

Check the journal's past issues, which will usually come with a page that says who the editorial board members are. If you can't find it online, get it from a print copy.


How can writing a Review Paper possibly help in the CV of a undergraduate student? I'm  a student of computer science amd I've written a reseaech review article on Fibonacci Sequence which will be published next month in a math journal. All I wanted to know is how will it help in my academic profile and what affects will it make in my CV?

Any work of quality adds value to your profile. If I refer to your question, even the act of writing a review paper, if performed by the rules of the art, is something that you can show and discuss about.

Addtionnaly, if the work has received some sound academic validation (published in a reputed journal) of course this adds to your resume. It adds sometimes more if the topic of your work is close to your background, which seems to be the case here.

Beware though: it is not common for an undergraduate to be able to write correctly a review paper, esp. on a well-paved topic such as Fibonacci numbers. So, to be blunt, if your paper was accepted almost without review in a local university journal, it might weight less. Or even negatively.

This really depends on who reads your CV: some will be impressed by the: "published in the Mathematical Journal of Mathematics". Some others may have a look at your paper precisely. If they find that the content is of low level, they might have a more negative opinion than if they were not aware of your paper.


Is there a university that has only graduate programs? Is there any university in the United States (or Europe) fully committed to graduate programs (master and PhD)?

Why this is not a common scheme? Why research universities are not interested in this model? Without huge number of undergraduate students, a university can save money on campus expenses, and heavily uses its resources for research.

There are some universities that offer primarily postgraduate degrees; Wikipedia has a list. Some notable examples on this list are Rockefeller University (US) and the Weizmann Institute of Science (Israel).

However, this doesn't necessarily save money; undergraduates in the United States typically pay tuition, after all. Other sources of income for universities in the United States (such as federal Pell grants) also apply only to undergraduate students. Furthermore, having a local population of undergraduate students allows budding academics (PhD students) to get teaching experience.


Using my published work on another paper I am currently working on a new publication that uses the same control algorithms that I implemented on another experiment. The controllers are well explained in the published paper but I wish to incorporate the block diagrams and a summarized explanation of the controllers in the new paper.

My question is: can I reuse these figures? do I require permission or a citation will suffice? My reasoning for doing this is to provide the reader with a clear picture of the controllers rather than just a reference to a paper.

thank you

You have two options. If what you want to do is exactly what you would do if the previous paper were by someone else, then just do that. Quote yourself as if you were another author and give appropriate references.

However, if you wish to go beyond that and you have yielded copyright to the journal that published the first paper you need their permission - as stupid as that sounds.

I expect that most reputable journals would give you permission (in writing, of course) since the work is yours.

If you retain copyright though, you can copy it freely, but still reference the original.

Well, a third option, is to just create a new diagram without reference to the old one, even if that also seems stupid. The simplest thing, though, may just be go send readers to the other paper for the diagram.

Copyright law is a minefield. Self-plagiarism is a thing.


The complication of not inviting my ex-supervisor to a podcast dedicated to our sub-field? I am hosting a podcast related to our field where we invite the stars of our field, the podcast has grabbed an audience from different demographic regions and it becomes very well know in the community. Before that, my ex-supervisor who is in the field and somehow is well known in the field was trying to destroy my career, it was a long story and s(he) was abusive. Now, no one knows about that, I feel sometimes it may sound unethical as I somehow invited everyone the field except him/her. The podcast also got an award from the events organized by the leaders of the field. I don't know how to be neutral, should I invite him/her at some point? because it becomes blatant I am trying to avoid inviting him/her, I know s(he) destroyed me literally, but now we have an audience and at least I have to be inclusive, do you think I have to invite him/her?

Using your position as an organizer to not invite the people you don't like to your thing is the only real reason anyone in academia ever organizes anything. They might retaliate but it doesn't really sound like your relationship is worth anything anyway. Just make sure not to actually say what you're doing, if anyone asks you about it just make up a generic excuse about scheduling.


Conjunctive adverbs in academic writing As scientists, researchers and scholars, how do you feel when you read a scientific document that contains a lot of conjunctive adverbs, like however, in addition, etc?

Does it sound non-scientific to you?

If you did not notice it in other papers, then do you use these adverbs in your scientific documents?

Doesn't it depend on the context? I don't understand why you think it might be un-scientific. "However, at temperatures above 120C, the solution is liable to explode catastrophically". That might be worth saying in a scientific document.

Other literary phrases have a similar effect when the intent is to inform the reader. They also tend to mentally "flag" important phrases so that they are less likely to be overlooked. The word "however" especially gives the reader an immediate hint that the next phrase or sentence is somehow different from what has come before. A contrast is being presented. It "primes" the reader to consider the distinction. Other such words also have a traditional "flagging" use, though different from that of  "however".

The language is what it is. But each field has certain phrasing that is common there and the writing might seem awkward when it is abandoned. I'll guess, without evidence, that "however" is less common in math writing, than in, say, philosophy, where alternative arguments might need to be introduced. In mathematics, a paper will tend to drive inexorably toward a conclusion. However, in philosophy alternate views are often introduced so as to find a way to some truth. (You see what I did there?)


Applying to PhD Programmes with novel undergraduate degrees I'm applying for undergraduate studies and there is one question that keeps returning to my mind. Lots of novel degree programmes started to emerge within universities (at least where I live). For instance, one started offering a course in "Quantum Engineering", another one in "Nanostructure Engineering". Undoubtedly, a major cause for that is marketing (they sound nice), but when I looked into them, most are just interdisciplinary, specialized degrees in physics with chemistry.

Now, assuming I'm willing to pursue a PhD in an area related to those previously mentioned degrees, how would having one of those degrees affect an application as opposed to having a standard degree in physics?

On one side, I find such degrees more commensurate with my interests and intentions for further study, which would allow me to specialize earlier. Thus, I should be able to find and perform relevant research or internships more easily. But I'm also worried that such novel degrees would spark cynism and distrust that could be disadvantageous to a potential application for a PhD.

Thanks in advance for any response.

Note that I'm answering this from the perspective of an applicant rather than someone on a PhD admissions committee.

  "(...) how would having one of those degrees affect an application as opposed to having a standard degree in physics?"

I don't think that the name of the degree itself would affect your application. However, I think it would be a good idea to make sure that you carefully explain the content of your degree (for instance, in your research statement/ statement of interest/ personal statement, or get one of your referees to do this in their letter), so that the admissions committee understands what courses you have taken and how these relate to a more "standard" degree scheme.

From the degree titles that you mention, I'm guessing that these will involve a large amount of normal undergraduate physics and maths, the names of which will also be on your transcript for the admissions people to see.

  "I'm also worried that such novel degrees would spark cynicism and
  distrust that could be disadvantageous to a potential application for a PhD."

The most important component of a successful PhD application is your demonstrated aptitude or ability to perform research. If you can do this, and do it well, then I think the name of your degree will matter less.

I speak from personal experience on this; my undergraduate degree is in Astrophysics, with a lot of specialised astro modules, but for my PhD I'm moving into theoretical cosmology, an area which is more commonly populated by applied mathematicians and theoretical physicists. I just had to make sure I "sold" my degree to the admissions committees by explaining that my degree was sufficiently theoretical. Getting some research experience by writing a dissertation during my fourth (Master's) year undoubtedly helped this.

If you're still worried about people distrusting the value of your degree, I would recommend trying to find out if the degree scheme is accredited in any way; for example, here in the UK, all reputable physics degrees are standardised and accredited by the Institute of Physics. I don't know what country you are in, but something similar may exist there.

Finally, as I mentioned in a comment, it might be best not to specialise too early (although you sound as though you have a pretty good idea of what you want to do). The option in this case would be to enroll on a straight physics degree scheme and specialise later on by taking any optional modules that are available (modules which would probably be mandatory if you were on the Quantum Engineering scheme, for example). The best person to advise you about the possibility of doing this would be the admissions tutor at the university offering these courses. They will be able to tell you what combinations of modules lead to which degree.


How much study gap is acceptable in New Zealand? I got my Master about 4 years ago from Iran. Since then, I have been working in a research group and published 4 papers in journals with IF between 1.767 to 4.594, including a paper related to my dissertation, and still working on 2 other research projects with my former supervisor in the university in Iran, based in Tehran. I was about to apply for pursuing my Ph.D. in New Zealand in the fields of Mathematics and Industrial Engineering when the pandemic emerged. I am a bit worried that the educational gap affects my plan negatively. Plus, I am at the age of 44 with 18 years of practical experience in industries and research, and I cannot fall asleep because of my worrieness.

It sounds like you have still being doing research and publishing since your masters. If you have still been keeping your skills fresh, that means you haven't really had a gap, regardless of whether or not you were registered as a student. Just explain this when applying and your gap will not be a concern. Your recommendation letters and publications can attest to that fact.
Age should not be a concern from the university's perspective. Although, a prospective supervisor may wonder about your perspective -- why do you want to do a PhD now? why not earlier? If you can give a good answer about your aspirations, then that will allay any concerns.


How important is it to work in industry before attempting a PhD? I am wanting to know how necessary it is to work in industry after undergrad and before applying to a PhD. On one hand, I have a lot of industry/ research experience and have a good deal of specialized knowledge in the area of computer science that I want to research. On the other hand, most people I work with worked in industry before getting their PhD. What's the general consensus?

From my experience in CS in Canada, most student do not have industry experience before doing their Ph.D. And I have not seen this as a requirement for entering the Ph.D either.  The reason is that a Ph.D. is not an industrial project although it could be related to the industry in some cases. But it does not need to.  During a Ph.D. the goal is not to commercialize a project. But it is to advance knowledge in a given field. Some people do a Ph.D. project in collaboration with a company. But from my experience, most people don't. So to answer your question: it is not important to have industry experience. But it can help. Perhaps that you will know how to better manage your time, etc. and this may be help in carrying your Ph.D project.


Access to math papers I graduated with my PhD in math two years ago, and I am no longer affiliated with a university. However I am still actively researching. Often it's possible to get papers on arxiv or directly from the author's website, but sometimes it isn't (particularly for older papers). Public libraries, at least around here, don't have subscriptions to mathscinet. Do I really have to pay if I want these papers?

Mathematicians will often send you their preprints (not the work in progress), if not already on their pages, if you ask kindly. I suggest to title the email with "Paper request: [Paper title], [Journal name], [Year]" for an efficient query.

Back in 1996, I was working my Msc on a subtopic of number theory (diophantine approximations and continued fractions of polynomial roots in finite fields). I was away from my university, and working without a university student card. I was spending a lot of time at Institut Henri Poincaré, photocopying articles from mathematical journals for my research. I badly needed a conference paper: A. J. van der Poorten, Continued fractions of formal power series, Advances in number theory, Proc. of the 3rd conf. of the CNTA, 1991. No university around had these proceedings, and Australia was too far.

"Alf" was a big name in the field (to me at least). And email and WWW were not very widespread in France. Yet I found his email, and spent about 1 hour to write the most polite email I could, in the  afternoon. The next morning, the postscript was in my inbox, with a nice answer by A. J.: "thank you for your interest in my work, good luck with your study."

This gesture both:

permitted me to work on myy thesis,
boosted my confidence (as a low-level student) in approaching persons.

which helps me a lot now. I am still thankful to him now, and often think about  him, even if I never met him. So far, mathematicians have always answered my requests, sometimes even with a scan and standard mail (with nice  stamps) when the  paper does not exist in electronic form.

Now, a lot of papers are available online. I insist one should browse researcher's webpage pages (instead of relying only on web search): sometimes, old papers are present in formats (dvi, ps.gz) that are not always indexed.

Finally, this could lead to discussions and, who knows, collaborations.

If everything else fails, different  options exist. One with  twitter hashtags has made the  news, I only mention it for the sake of information, and do not endorse the legal aspects.


Is it unethical to not able to complete a journal review within provided time ? I was invited to review a paper from a decent journal in my field. I was provided a month to review the article.

However, due to some work related commitments, I was not able to provide reviews within the stipulated time (and somehow forgot about the deadline). After 2 weeks of the deadline, I received an email from the editor for providing reviews on the article. I emailed him back that I will provide the reviews and mentioned the date and he acknowledged the same. However, on the date I had provided, I received an automated email that if I don't provide the reviews they will be forced to go ahead with the reviews from other reviewers.

I emailed them again that I have read the paper and ready with my reviews and will be uploading them within a few hours. But while filling the review form, I received another automated email stating that they have decided to move ahead without my reviews. Since it was my first opportunity to officially review a paper from a journal, the situation left me with the following questions

Was it unethical at my part to not able to provide the reviews within the provided time ?
Will it have any impact on my reputation as a reviewer in future?

Will it have any impact on my reputation as a reviewer in future?

As @darijgrinberg said in a comment, referees are quite often late with reviewing assignments. As an example, on one occasion (the only one I can remember) when I was unable to get a paper reviewed by the deadline I committed to, I sent an apologetic email to the editor a couple of days before the deadline explaining that I will be sending my report a week or two late. His sarcastic reply suggested that he found my apology very amusing and unusual, and he was in fact very pleased that I would be only a week or two late...

So, I think it’s not so much that your reputation will suffer because of this incident; rather, it’s more accurate to say that you have missed an opportunity to set yourself apart from all the other late reviewers - that is, it’s not a negative efffect but the absence of a positive one. But in any case I assume you will have many more opportunities of this type in the future, so I wouldn’t worry about it too much.

As for the ethics, again as Darij said, ethics has to do with willful acts. To forget things or be negligent or put yourself in situations where you are unable to deliver on a promise may be characterized as unprofessional (only a little bit in this particular case) and is certainly undesirable, but this has nothing to do with ethics.


Is it necessary that your partner (wife/husband) have English proficiency, when you are going to study abroad? I decided to go study Ph.D. in the United States. Is it necessary that my wife be good at English?

I am expressly interested in legal and statutory requirements of English proficiency for a spouse if I am going to be studying in the United States.

If you are in a large city or at a large university, then it probably isn't necessary. You will probably find a lot of people there, and their spouses, who speak your language, whatever it is.

In a small town, however, it would be a different story, and your spouse might be a bit isolated without some language skills.

There are many large State Universities throughout the country that have students and faculty from all around the world. When I was in grad school in such a place (long ago) I had neighbors from Iran, in fact. Some such large places have organizations for spouses of foreign faculty and students in which people can get together, though everyone tends to speak a different language.

Also, many places, even small ones, have programs in secondary (and other) schools for English as a Second Language (ESL). These are taught by specialists. So, I think that no matter where you are, there would be opportunities to learn even if you didn't find people who speak your own language.

As for the legalities, there is no requirement that a person be able to speak English. However, to become a citizen you need some minimal proficiency: http://pjclaw.net/uscitizenship/english-language-requirements-for-naturalization/. But you don't need proficiency on arrival and, since the process is long, there is an opportunity to learn.

For the requirements to get a visa, see this site: http://www.ustraveldocs.com. But I note that there is no information there about Iran. The best place to get information is to visit a US consulate or similar place where visas are issued and get current requirements.


Is "lab" too informal a word for a formal cover letter? When applying for a postdoc position, it makes sense to write something like this in the cover letter:

Dear Professor NAME. I am writing to apply for POSITION in your lab

What I'm stuck on, is that a cover letter is a formal letter, so should be written in a formal register. However, the word "lab" is an abbreviation and so inherently informal, which makes it seem wrong. On the other hand "laboratory" sounds even more wrong because no-one says "at my laboratory" in speech.
Is the word "lab" appropriate in this context?

I agree with you that both lab and laboratory don't sound good. Maybe you could use "group" instead?


How to put remote internship on CV Due to the current pandemic I started working remotely on a research project several months ago under the supervision of a physics professor. Just a few days ago we finished and submitted a paper to a peer-reviewed journal. Since I plan to apply to graduate school I would like to mention in my CV that I carried out a research project with professor A from university B. However, since all the work was done remotely I am not sure how it would be convenient to put this on my CV.

Should I put it under the "professional experience" section? If the answer is yes, how should I include it?
Or should I wait until the paper is published and add it under a new section called "Publications"? I guess doing it this way would imply that I did research and it would not be necessary to add it to "professional experience".

I would list your internship as part of your experience and, if you think it's relevant (I'm not sure it is), mention that it was remote.  List your paper as submitted for publication.  If it's ultimately rejected, you should probably remove it.  But for now, let's be optimistic.


What did my referee mean by asking about my "Plan B"? I am applying for PhD this Fall. Came across one of my referees today, had a great conversation and then he asked if I had a plan B if I would not be admitted. Does it mean he thinks I'm not good enough?

Don't overthink this.  It sounds like he's just showing a friendly interest in your plans.  No matter how "good" you are, graduate admissions always has some degree of uncertainty, and so everybody should consider what they will do if they don't get admitted.  He just wants to know what that would be for you.

If he really didn't think you were good enough, he wouldn't have agreed to be a reference for you.


Can a personal meeting with a scientist be referenced? Suppose I meet a scholar at my university or some other institute, who is a famous person known for his or her work. and I ask questions related to the subject I am working on, and I get some answers or other useful information. Ethically, can I  cite this meeting in my paper or not? (Provided I do tell the person that I am working on something related, etc.)

Strictly speaking, yes. The APA style, among others, does have instructions on how to cite private conversations (see https://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/560/11/ for an example), but in practice I've never seen it been used in psychology (or natural science) papers. This is probably because a personal conversation cannot be easily verified, which makes such citations less useful. One thing you can do is to track down the relevant papers and thank your colleague in the acknowledgement section.


Is it fair to offer students a last-minute extension to finish a test? A friend of mine who is a CS grad student at a US university took a class in which the students were given an extra hour on a two-hour exam. The trouble is that this offer was made in the last five minutes when the professor realized the students were not able to finish answering all questions.

I am personally against this kind of offerings because it feels like they do more harm than good and reflects poorly on the professor's planning. Students plan their approach to solving a test based on the available time and often speed up in the last hour or 45 minutes to complete as much as possible. This certainly degrades the quality of the answers. Now when there is a sudden offer of extra time, many students will be confused on how to make use of this time. Ultimately, it will come down to the students who have better time management skills rather than those who really know better answers.

So, the question is: Is the practice fair and if not what a student can do about it?

As I've mentioned elsewhere on this site, students often seem to think in terms of "fairness", but upon sufficiently intense scrutiny the concept is so fuzzily defined that it may well be that the only "fair" grading scheme is to give all students the same grade...an outcome which would certainly be unacceptable to many students.  Moreover:

Ultimately, it will come down to the students who have better time management skills rather than those who really know better answers.

Any way of administrating a course favors students with certain incidental skills over others.  Giving a prearranged, timed exam favors students with sufficiently good time management skills over students with very poor ones.  And not only that, the students who live "on-campus" are advantaged over commuter students.  Students who have a watch can look at it, whereas others need to twist around in their seats to look at the clock in the back of the room [if there is one], and so forth.
Every seasoned instructor I know would agree that most exams test subject-unspecific study skills as well as "real knowledge".  Not to be too much of a downer, but the idea that a student has a well-defined "real knowledge" is a convenient reification, something that modern academic culture must believe in approximately in order to function but which it is dangerous to take too seriously.
The real issue is to design the exam experience so as to test a reasonable set of skills, weighted in a reasonable way.  There is no universal way to do this: it is better to be as explicit as possible about what skill set you want your exams to test and look to see if they do what you wanted.
Anyway, a better question is: is this a good practice?  I think the answer is no, at least in many situations.  Here are two obvious issues:

An announcement which occurs five minutes before the end of an exam may come too late for students who have already left the exam.

Unless the cohort of students taking the exam has the identical academic schedule [this is prohibitively unlikely in many graduate programs at American universities], it is very unlikely that every student will actually be able to stay for the extra hour.

I would describe the above two issues as concerning "fairness".  Any student who did not get the extra hour for either reason would have a very legitimate complaint.

I am personally against this kind of offerings because it feels like they do more harm than good and reflects poorly on the professor's planning.

I agree that it reflects poorly on the professor's planning.  Whether it will do more harm than good to the students' performance depends on the exam and the students.  I agree that many or most students would find the experience of learning that they have 50% more time at the very end of an exam stressful, and many would be resentful that they would have used their time differently had they known this information at the beginning of the exam.
In summary: unfair?  Yes, if certain things happen, otherwise maybe not.  A good practice?  No, I don't think so.  It sounds like a rather inexperienced / sloppy instructor to me, honestly.


When is an academic a -sensei and when is he/she a -hakase? I'm not Japanese, and I've been emailed by someone who is Japanese, in the context of potential academic collaboration. He's in industry, not academia. He used the "-sensei" honorific to refer to me, while I had called him using his company-position-related honorific.

This seemed strange to me, since he's older and more senior than me (in most respects anyway). I was assuming he'd call me "-san", or if he wanted to be nice, then "-hakase" or no honorific at all.

My question: In what circumstances is it customary to call non-medical academics, with a doctoral degree, "-sensei", and in what circumstances is "-hakase" the custom?

I've lived in Japan for two years and can speak the language to some extent.
Keigo is complicated, and any rule you learn about seems to have lots of exceptions. After two years, I felt that I had some idea, but I felt that I had far from mastered the intricacies. In particular, older people often addressed me using keigo for reasons I didn't quite understand.
"Sensei" is a general respectful term for a teacher. Since he is interested in an academic collaboration specifically, perhaps he regards you as "senior" because you have an academic position and he does not.
"Sensei" is a general and common form of address, used for academics and other teachers. I have not heard "hakase" used as a form of address.
In any case, he has certainly addressed you with respect. If you're unsure of what Japanese title to use, and your correspondence is in English, I'd encourage addressing him in English as "Mr. X" or (if he has a doctorate) "Dr. X".


One of my co-authors is an "IEEE Life Member" can I add this to my IEEE transaction manuscript? I just finished a Transaction Manuscript, and one of the co-authors is a "Life member IEEE". Initially, I inserted "Senior Member IEEE" just after his name in the manuscript, but he pointed out to me that he is a life member. So my question is, can I remove the "Senior Member IEEE" and insert "Life Member IEEE" even though I haven't seen any paper having "Life member IEEE"?

Being a new graduate student, I never knew that you could add "life*" to the paper. I felt you can only add member, senior member, follow. After googling, for a while, I found out that one can add life member, life fellow, or life senior member to an author's name.


How flexible is grant funding? I have two questions about grants:

If someone wins a grant, do they have to perform research exactly
about the questions they proposed in the grant? Or, is there room to
change the research question later?

What to do if there is uncertainty when I do not know which lab
or even country I will be in the coming year. As I understand, the
grant is written with the help of a PI and ideally the research is
done in their lab. Do people set in the stone where they want to do
the research before writing the grant? If the postdoc has to move to
another country, what happens to the grant? Is it divided between
the postdoc and the PI?

I'm going to assume the US and the National Science Foundation for the purposes of this answer because it's the main thing I have experience with. Also, "IT DEPENDS":

If the research question needs to change a bit because the research isn't going exactly where you thought it would, the Principal Investigator should have a discussion with the Program Officer/Manager assigned to them by NSF. There's some slop in the system. They'll probably want you to follow the science. Biology awards probably can't be turned into pure theoretical Mathematics ones, but the PO will be able to guide the PI.
NSF money can't be used to pay a foreign national to work in their home country (nor an American in a foreign one) except under extreme circumstances or ones required by the science (think Large Hadron Collider or the Antarctic Program). The grant is to the institution under the direction of the PI, not directly to the PI and other named people. And, if the postdoc decides to go back to their home country, they just go home and don't get to work on the project anymore unless another source of funding with different rules comes along. If the PI decides to move from Harvard to Yale and wants to take the grant with them, then they can ask Harvard to release it to Yale and NSF for their permission, and maybe it'll all work out. Happens all the time. There were certain advantages at review-time for awarding the grant to the PI when they were at Harvard (Facilities document), now NSF has to decide if Yale is a good enough substitute. I've never heard of it not working out, but it might if the PI was taking a big step down (Harvard to a community college, maybe?). If the PI were trying to take an Engineering Research Center (ERC) or telescope or supercomputer with them, then everyone would probably say "no."


Is listing non-academic interests on academic CVs important? Since the first time I had to write an (academic) CV, I seem to be getting two conflicting opinions on the subject of including non-academic interests on an academic CV.

(Some examples of such interests would be sports, cooking, etc.)

The "sources" of my advice include professional people in and outside of academia, (not that many) PhD students, a lot of internet searches and observing the CVs of other academics/researchers.

One one hand, I heard that including a section about such interests is important, as it is supposed to demonstrate that you are a "diverse, complete person" and not a solitary scientist/workaholic. This is also one of the more common "don't forget" advice I found on not-academia-specific guides to writing a CV.
On the other hand, a lot of examples of CVs of senior scientist didn't include anything of the sort, which mostly makes sense to me: since I am writing a CV to apply for a position / grant in an academic concept, I should be judged based on my academia-related activities.

So, I would like to know what is actually the convention in academia? I can imagine the answer might depend on several factors such as:

culture of the country
culture of the field
seniority of the scientist (e.g. PhD student vs permanent Professor)

But, then, I am really not sure. Is it a matter of convention depending on some or all of the above, or, if not, what is the global convention for including non-academia related interests in an academic CV?

The convention in an academic CV is not to include information on non-academic hobbies or interests that are not relevant to your professional skills and qualifications.

You will find this view confirmed on sites that give specific advice on the academic CV. (e.g.: this one).

That's not to say there's never a good reason to include this information; there may be, in some cases. (For example, you might mention your time abroad doing unrelated humanitarian work to explain a chronological gap.) But in academic CVs it's not standard.


Ask former PhD supervisor advice I did my PhD on topic X, and my PhD advisor is an expert on X and on Y. For a problem I have come across in my postdoc, I think that Y would be a good approach. There is no one I am currently working with that I could ask about Y, so I would like to send my PhD advisor an email asking for literature recommendations on topic Y. Is this customary? What would be the most polite way to ask? What is the best way to go about this?

Is this customary? What would be the most polite way to ask? What is the best way to go about this?

Don't overthink this: Just email your advisor, it is normal.


Mathematically Oriented Disciplines I am a research scholar commencing my research in the field of deep learning. Deep learning uses lot of tools from mathematics. To name a few : linear algebra, probability and statistics, optimization.

My mathematical background is very shaky. When I read research papers in deep learning, I invariably skip the sections that are mathematically heavy. However, I can understand the higher level details, such as what the research work is about, what algorithm the authors have used, and so on. But I never have the feeling of completely understanding the paper.

I feel that I cannot do original research unless I become really strong in the above mentioned subjects in mathematics. Is this claim correct?

That said, can someone publish papers in deep learning without really understanding the mathematics behind it?

I feel that I cannot do original research unless I become really strong in the above mentioned subjects in mathematics. Is this claim correct?

If it is, then what would you do about it?  Probably, take one math class per semester, and in the summer too if possible, and do some additional reading on your own when classes are not in session.

If the claim is not correct... what harm would it do to strengthen your math skills, even if they turn out not to be essential for your field?


How is East European PhD viewed in the USA? Eastern Europe is composed of the former Warsaw Pact, plus the European part of Russia (e.g. St. Petersburg).
I believe Eastern Europe's higher education is influenced by the former USSR. On the other hand, there has always been a political tussle between the USA and Russia. Therefore, there should be some kind of stigma in the USA in recognizing Ph.D. degrees acquired from those countries. No?
How is East European Ph.D. viewed in the USA? Are they considered on par with American PhDs or at least compatible with American education?

I haven't observed direct stigma against Eastern European schools, but the big indirect problem may be that US academics are not familiar with your school
When viewing large numbers of applicants or correspondents, this makes it hard to categorize things.  Rightly or wrongly, there is often a need to filter more individuals than you have the ability to research in depth, so that can count against you.  Note that this isn't restricted to one direction; I lived in Eastern Europe for years, and I had a friend who went to the US to study at Brown.  Now, she was in the private sector, but was routinely frustrated that no one in her country had heard of her school, and therefore didn't place much weight on her educational achievements relative to how an Ivy League education would be assessed in the US.
This is similar to the impact of studying at a respected, but small, regional school.  There are many of them around the US, and within that school's geographic region you're likely to be interacting with people who are familiar with the school, or possibly even went there themselves.  But in a different part of the US, the name of your school would impart no real information to the observer.
Similarly, publications may be in a language US academics can't read, or may be poorly translated, or may be published in journals they've never heard of.  In my experience it's very likely that academics will be inclined to judge you, your work, and your program, on their merits once you get past that initial filter.  So if your goal is to work in the US,  try to build personal contacts with academics in the US (e.g. at conferences, via email), try to publish in English, attend a school with some international recognition (in Prague, for example, you have CERGE-EI which is deliberately US-styled), and anything else that helps overcome that initial "I don't recognize any of this" when someone in the US reads your CV.


Does some degree of stubbornness help for a researcher? Doing research requires exploring a tree of different ideas and then, upon failures, tracking back to some extent, up to giving up on the whole project and changing topics (or even quitting your PhD). You might err on both sides: change approach too much, give up too early, or too late. (See for instance this answer or Half good and some not good results in a research paper?). Most importantly, though, often you won't know that you'll actually succeed until you did, and things might look bleak until then.

Does some degree of stubbornness help being a researcher (I couldn't extract an answer so easily from 2)? Lacking that, do you know any metaheuristics to approach this decision?

EDIT: I read this idea off the mention of "stubbornness and self-delusion" in this rant - and I've observed this trait in at least some researchers.

EDIT 2: an answer suggested that I talk about persistence instead. And probably that's the right compromise and what you actually should have. But I prefer the more provocative phrasing, also because I've anecdotical experiences of stubbornness as a "professional risk" of the profession.

Although I understand what you are getting at, I would like to say that stubbornness is perhaps not a good trait for a scientist. My dictionary provides the following: Stubborn: Having or showing dogged determination not to change one's attitude or position on something, esp. in spite of good arguments or reasons.

Clearly a scientist needs doggedness and stamina to endure long and hard experiments, field work, often monotonous work on data and theory, as well as other issues met in the workplace. To be able to change footing in light of new evidence is, however, an important trait. So being stubborn, in the sense of the definition, would be very counter productive in our effort to have science progress. Persistence and perseverance are perhaps synonyms that better reflect the traits you aim for.

So, yes it is important to be able to endure. Being a scientist is usually based on a deep appreciation for the subject and the research, which is why it is possible to endure the pressures that exist. It is a bit like being a top athlete, very few will excel without a deep love for what they do. As soon as you lose the drive it is difficult to continue because of the demands. Maintaining the drive is therefore a very important aspect of academia and the workplace in which you act.


What is a System paper As I was going to submit a paper in one of the Elsevier's journal (Web Semantics), it asked me to select the type of paper. The types include "research paper", "system paper!", "ontology paper", "position paper", "survey paper", "briefing paper".

I don't know what are they, and didn't find a document about them except this which doesn't tell much. I doubt if my paper is just a regular or research paper or a system paper.

In my paper I proposed a computer application which is a software system. however, it provides a solution for a problem. Does this make it a system paper!!!

The page you linked to provides a PDF named Author Information Pack (at the very top, right under the headline).

In that file, the different paper types are described. In particular, a Systems Paper is defined as follows:

  Widely adopted semantic systems and systems that generate a far above average amount of interest in the Semantic Web community, may be explained in systems papers. Systems papers are recommended to have 6 - 8 pages in double column format.


I want to pursue topics from different fields (pure math,CS) as a researcher. Which one to choose for my PhD? My background: I have two master degrees in pure math and applied CS. I am interested in working in both areas, and there are certain topics in each area (extensions of my -completely different- two master theses)  that I am interested in working in, so there does not exist the possibility of combining them in any way: math its 100% proofs and nothing else; computer science it's code a prototype, computing the some accuracy metrics, writing more code.

However, my working style is to switch between these two field every 9 month, since I quickly get bored, if I only work in one of the fields.

I recently received an offer for a PhD at a top European university (think Cambridge/Oxford/ETH... ). Like any funded place, this one is tied to a single topic from one of those two fields and some compromises have to be made to harmonize my topic choice with the problems my supervisor likes to work on.

1) Do you know of any strategies that I could use to keep switching topics, so to preserve my passion for both fields?
("Utopically", I would get accepted into a second PhD, where I would work on a topic from the other field and then keep rotating every 0.5 - 1 years between them, i.e. as soon as I achieved a milestone in field and start to feel boredom creeping on, go to the other field. But no sane supervisor would accept that, I think. And the program structure would.)

2) Are there ways to convince my supervisor to let maybe 1.5 take year-long time off? That would already help a lot I think. How should I best go about this, without giving a bad first impression ("you haven't even started, and already you think about going away").

3) Or should I just stick with it and try to finish as fast as possible with the PhD and then try to move to the other field for postdoc (supposing I could get a postdoc position in say, math, if I did my PhD in CS, and only published 2 smaller articles in math in the meantime)?

4) If there absolutely no way to switch between topics for my PhD, I'm unsure which field would be the best to go for for my PhD: Pure math (doing proofs) or CS (coding proof-of-concepts in machine learning and related areas)?

I assume many will say things like "this is a PhD! You have to learn how to stick with one topic, because this is life and life can be hard". But  working on multiple problems at once is a tried and tested way to keep the fun in the research (as done perhaps most famously by Perelman: "he liked to work on several problems at once" quote). Alas, if I knew them, I would not post here; I'm really at a loss for what the best step would be to preserve my love for doing research, while not ending up unemployed and keeping the door open for a career in academia.

edit: While the current answer provides very good general feedback, I would still like to know more (very) concrete information about 1)-4).

Generally speaking PhD studies are all about specialization. One dives very deeply into a narrow field. This is especially true of math and can also be true of CS, depending on subfield.

There can be exceptions and some synthetic work is possible, but it depends a great deal on your advisor and what he or she is comfortable with. If you can find an advisor at the intersection you should be able to pursue a joint approach.

After the PhD you are much freer to pursue your own goals not constricted by the concerns of your advisor. I would suggest, pretty strongly, that you explore your wishes with a doctoral supervisor and take their advice. If the advice is to pursue the one field for now, it isn't a decision you need to live with for all time. But the advice will likely be good advice.

Doing a second doctorate will probably be superfluous. You will have deep research experience from the first. If it is in math, much of what you learned will have some application to thinking about some of what is important in CS.

Doing two doctorates simultaneously seems masochistic to me, especially as you will have two advisors each with different, possibly conflicting, expectations and each putting constraints on your time.

Think specialize now. Think widening interests for the future. It will better match the expectations of those around you and make life easier.

But you will also need ways to not get bored, given your description of the problem. It might even be that while focusing deeply on one of the fields you can 'play about' in the other for a short periods just as a stress reducer as needed.


How to remind a professor about sending papers to read? In a face-to-face meeting with a professor, he told me he would send me some papers to read. It's been almost a week, so I assume he's forgotten. That is understandable, since he has a lot to do. I would like to send an email to remind him, but am having difficulty writing it. How can I phrase it nicely?

Dear Professor X,

  during our meeting last week, you mentioned that you wanted to send me links to a couple of papers. Would you mind?

  Best, Y

I often find students agonizing over the exact wording of totally normal emails. The text above took me 10 seconds to write, and that's the amount of time you can expect the typical professor to spend on the typical email. You're not going to be held to a much higher standard either. Be polite, formal, and above all brief. Address the person at the top, sign off at the bottom. That's all that's being asked for.


What makes a publication (or a publishing forum) academically acceptable for inclusion in a literature review? I'm in the process of conducting a systematic literature review and an integral part of this is the definition of inclusion and exclusion criteria for filtering the search-result-publications.

A common criteria for these reviews is that the publication is an academic publication or otherwise academically acceptable. I haven't been able to find a proper definition for this. The ones that I can think of are that the publication fora must exercise peer-review on the papers and that the fora are widely accepted by (inter)national funding agencies.

Hence, my question is what makes a publication or a publishing forum academically acceptable?

I am afraid this is an impossible question to get right: An "acceptable academic publishing forum" would be one that is accepted by "acceptable academics" - and "acceptable academics" would be identified by publishing in "acceptable academic publishing fora"...

Peer-reviewed is not a bad criterion, but it falls short: There are peer-reviewed journals for creationists and homeopaths - so the value of peer-review depends crucially on who the peers are. It doesn't even work as a necessary criterion, as missing the arXiv for math-y fields or books for humanities would mean that a literature review is very incomplete.

"Acceptance by funding bodies" gets the question backwards: Funding bodies try to approximate what the academic community considers good publication venues, they don't define it.

If formal inclusion/exclusion criteria are important for you (maybe because you do some meta-statistics?), you will need to look for field-specific standards. In medical subjects, I could imagine that "listed on pubmed" would be an acceptable one. In this case, looking are published meta-studies and their criteria would be useful.


How to choose the right institution for pursuing tenure-track? I've got 2 offers for a tenure-track position (computer science). One at a well known "tier 1" institution and one at an institution that would be considered "tier 2", both in the US.

Most people I know in academia would immediately go for option 1, considering it a great opportunity. While I do agree that this would look great on my CV, I'm somewhat cautious due to reports that tier 1 institutions are very reluctant granting tenure to anyone who doesn't find the cure for cancer...

I'm well aware that getting tenure at a tier 2 institution won't be a field day either, but looking at their previous record, a high percentage of assistant professors at that institution did make the cut.

Any advice?

Congratulations on your two offers ! As for your question, it's hard for us on this forum to gauge your choices. Tier 1 and Tier 2 are tricky categorizations (bottom of Tier 1 ? top of tier 2 ? area specializations ?). More generally though, it sounds like you're worried that getting tenure at the Tier 1 university is extremely difficult.

But this is something where some data gathering might help. It shouldn't be too hard to determine the number of cases that went up for tenure at T1 in the last (say) 5-10 years, and how many were successful. This is in fact a legitimate question to ask the chair of the department. You can ask how the process works, and you can even ask current assistant professors if they feel they're getting good guidance on the tenure process.

You should do the same for the T2 university as well. Then you'll have more specific information to work with.

No one can tell you whether you will get tenure at T1 or not, but with this data you can get a sense of whether it's "yes unless you mess up" or "no unless you cure cancer".

You can also try to determine which university offers you the best home for your research efforts for the next X years without worrying too much about what comes at the end of it. This is not to say that you should walk into a situation where no one gets tenure, of course, but your data collection should help with that.


Should I write a recommendation letter for a student at a previous job/institution? I receive requests for recommendation many times, but I have received one from a student belonging at a previous affiliation of mine, asking for a favourable letter in view of their achievements.

I am aware of the fact that if I comment on the performance of the student, it could be used against me, since it is good practice to "erase" all the material, marks, personal information of the students and staff relationship at a previous job. So I am hesitant to go in that direction. On the other hand, I could comment only very generally on the skills of the student, which could backfire their application to a new job

Differently from this question I am not looking for a recommendation, but giving one...

When you change job, you don’t erase your memory (well, not in all jobs), nor do you all your responsibilities related to this previous job vanish. It is true that leaving a position creates certain obligations in the data you can retain, and how you can use non-publicly available information pertaining to your older institution. However, in the particular case of a reference letter, I don't think it should cause trouble. Moreover, reference letters are confidential.

Actually, I'd go further than saying it should not be a problem. In fact, I think if you can honestly write him a good recommendation letter, it is part of your responsibility to do it. This responsibility is not to your former institution, but to the student and the academic system as a whole.


Considering a second PhD, this time in statistics. Will any professors be interested in working with me? I have a PhD in applied mathematics from a top university. I didn't realise it at the time because I was so focussed on my research, but it seems my research area (numerical analysis of PDEs) is actually very niche in terms of real-world problems in industry.

All the job listings I see are looking for people with a probability/statistics/machine learning background. There are literally hundreds of listings for these types of jobs for every one job in my area. I am currently a postdoc but I plan to leave academia for industry (probably finance) in the near future.

As the need for people with statistical skills is so clear, I have started considering the possibility of doing a second PhD, this time in a statistical area.

It would have to be part-time as I will be working full-time in industry. However, I currently work 7 days a week and very long hours on research as a postdoc, it is my hobby as much as my job. So when I begin working in industry, which is a standard 40 hour Mon-Fri working week, from my perspective I will have a huge amount of free time, i.e. eveninings and weekends, that I could dedicate to statistical research.

So I have several motivating factors for considering doing a second PhD:

Statistical skills are very much in demand and are of far more use in real-world applications than my own niche skillset. I would like to work on important real-world problems and it would be ideal to have a qualification for this.
I absolutely love research and having a goal to work towards to motivate me to get really deep into a topic. I will have alot of free time when I move to industry soon, and I would like to dedicate that time to something constructive.
I am interested in probability and statistics from a theoretical perspective and I would like to make a contribution to this field. Originally I applied for PhDs in this area, along with applied math PhDs; I went with the math PhD as I was also very interested in that area and it was a great opportunity to work with an excellent supervisor and university.

So a second PhD in a statistical area seems to make alot of sense to me.

Questions:

Would any professor even be interested in working with me considering
that I already a PhD and that I plan to work on the second PhD during evenings and weekends?
If you think there are professors that might be interested, how
should I go about approaching them? I would not like to appear
unprofessional.
I don't need any funding as I will be working full-time. Will this help me in finding a professor for a second PhD or is it largely irrelevant?

As most of the comments already say, doing a second PhD is probably not a good use of your time and not very helpful. From an industry perspective you have a math PhD, that means you are very smart and can learn anything, especially any maths very quickly. Learning some statistics or machine learning can be very helpful for an industry career but there is no need to get a formal degree in it. You can state in job applications that you have a math PhD and that you know statistics. Even if the statistics is entirely self taught in the real industry world this is equivalent to a PhD in statistics.


In what cases is Ethical Committee approval not necessary for a study? We intend to perform a study with a device we developed (approved for medical research). The tests are non-invasive and only require a very low power laser to be exposed to the skin (complying with all the existing norms).

People will have to travel from their place to our facilities periodically to perform this test.

We want to publish the results of our study, but we are afraid that at the end the journal might require an ethical committee approval (which costs a lot of time and money).

In what cases shouldn't be necessary an ethical committee approval?
Are there dermatology journals where this is not an issue for publication?

The exact regulations differ per country, but prospective studies with human subjects almost always need approval.

Since you tagged your question with "Netherlands", the relevant law is the WMO = "Wet medisch-wetenschappelijk onderzoek met mensen". Any research that falls under this law requires approval.

  Research falls under the WMO if the following criteria are met:

  It concerns medical/scientific research and
  Participants are subject to procedures or are required to follow rules of behaviour

There is a lot of information on the website of the Central Committee on Research Involving Human Subjects (CCMO).

You can usually also apply for a waiver from the IRB (at least in the Netherlands). You submit a request with a description of your intended research and the IRB will review your plans to determine whether your research does fall under the WMO and needs approval, or whether this requirement can be waived.

From the description of your plans, it seems likely that you need approval. Not having approval would not only mean that journals won't accept your paper, it would also mean that you'd be doing something illegal.


Does it make sense to list Ph.D.-level coursework in industry-focused CV? I recently defended my Ph.D. dissertation (Information Systems) and now it's time to apply for some positions. While I would love to stay in academia, my current highest priority is to find a good job in IT and/or management consulting. Since I've designed my coursework with partial industry (consulting) focus in mind, most of the courses that I've taken during my Ph.D. program are very relevant to potential work in a consulting environment. I've read this related question, but it has only academic focus, hence my question.

Currently I'm working on converting my former resume into two CV variants: one, focused on industry/consulting (updated and improved resume), and another, focused on academia (CV per se). My strategy is to include (mention) the relevant (practically, full) Ph.D.-level coursework into the industry/consulting CV variant and exclude that information from the academic one. What do you think of this strategy? Also, I'm interested whether it is beneficial to include my master's level coursework into the industry-focused CV. Any other advice and suggestions will be greatly appreciated.

My first job after my PhD was as a consultant. I suggest being selective with respect to what, and how much of your coursework to include.

Your degree speaks for your potential, and there is little use adding too much detail that is implied by it (in particular if you graduated from a reputable school). You want your CV to be one page only, so don't clutter it.

Begin with a brief executive summary, which generically could read like "Information system PhD with strong skills in (insert - say, system programming/data analysis/...) and communication (from X years as a teaching assistant)." Find something jazzy that you think fits you.

You can add relevant course work experience in a "skills" section, as appropriate, and further add anything valuable under "awards and honors" (if nothing else fits, don't shy away from mentioning performing well/near top/top of class in course work). It's also ok to maybe highlight some particularly relevant coursework (with grades). It would definitely help if your thesis work (which you should summarize) could be linked to the typical consulting job (bringing structure where little was before). At the bottom of the page, add three academic references if any of your faculty might be known in industry.

Two more points: I don't remember what the person's job name and description was, but in my case, I found someone at my school who proof-read my CV with lots of feedback (my initial version sucked badly). Secondly, you tend to read to de-emphasize your academic background in industry (eg, "list it after professional experience"), but this is simply not true for at least 2-5 years, depending, as your PhD will stay your greatest achievement for a while.

Take it with a grain of salt as I've been out of this for a while. Best of luck!