How to ask a professor to introduce other professors to me when he mentions that he has no funding? When asking for an opportunity to do a PhD with a professor at a US university, he replied:

  Excellent background. Unfortunately, I do not have funding to support
  new students. Good luck!

Now I want to tell him:

  Thank you for your time and consideration. Please keep me in mind if a funded position opens up in the future.

and I want to add that if there is any other professors that he can introduce to me in order to ask them for a PhD position.
What should I say?

Don't ask the professor for contacts to other professors where you could apply - there's a risk that he will perceive it as annoying, and in principle it is work that you could easily do on your own.

Instead, you could add something like the following to your response:

  Please feel free to forward my documents to any colleagues who could be interested in working with me.

This will put the professor more in a mindset of helping some colleagues to find a (hopefully) good student, which he might be more willing to consider instead of helping a random applicant to find another job opportunity.


What does it take for a lower-ranked university to compete with a top-ranked one? Let's take the Times Higher Education world rankings. Oxford is first, and the University of Bonn is 100th. (Nothing special about the THE - I just used it to pick examples of a top-ranked university and a lower-ranked one.)

Suppose I'm the rector of the University of Bonn and I want to make my university as prestigious as Oxford. What will I need?

If we assume that world university rankings are at least somewhat of a proxy for "prestige", then it seems that research output is a key determining factor for how prestigious a university is. To produce good research, presumably the most important ingredients are 1) research funding and 2) good faculty. Since good faculty can presumably be bought, does that mean that the most important factor is money? In other words, Oxford is much more prestigious than the University of Bonn because it is much richer, and if I can find $10+ billion and several years of time, I will be able to make my university one of the world's best?

Money can indeed buy a lot of things that will move you up in rankings, though probably not all. It's true that you will be able to attract good faculty with money -- spent on salaries, research infrastructure, beautiful offices and spacious labs well equipped with machinery, several postdocs attached to each professor position, and maybe money to support (grad) students and travel. For this, you will actually need a lot of money -- take a look at the budgets of the really good universities in the US and UK, and you will realize that you will need an operating budget in the $1+B region per year. So $10B will be spent quite quickly.

But that by itself will not be enough. Faculty will generally only go to places where there are also good students, and the best students go where they can historically expect to get an excellent education. To find out where these places are, they look at, say, the top 20 or 30 universities in the world -- so you're caught in a catch-22 if you want to move up. In other words, you have to have a long-term strategy to move up: things can't be achieved within a few years, but it will take 10, 20, 30 years of big spending if you really want to get high in that list.

There are some examples of relatively new universities who have really tried this, and you can look at the press coverage to see what they have achieved and what they haven't:

The King Abdullah University of Science and Technology (KAUST) in Saudi Arabia
The Okinawa Institute of Science and Technology (OIST) in Japan
National University of Singapore

There are other examples in China and in the gulf countries of universities that have (tried to) significantly rise in rankings in recent decades.


Publishing a paper that's already been cited I do theoretical CS. A few years ago, I did some research and wrote a paper on my results, posting it on arXiv. I thought about getting it published, but between applying to programs after graduation and starting my new job, it fell by the wayside. Recently, I found a new paper is coming out that cites mine, disproves a conjecture, and extends a result.

Does the existence of the new paper hurt or help my chances of eventually getting the paper published? More likely, I would aim to present it at a conference because I've been told that that's much easier in theoretical computer science, especially for unknown authors or niche topics. Does the new paper hurt or help me chances of presenting the paper at a conference? It would feel weird presenting research that's no longer the state-of-the-art. Should the paper be modified to acknowledge the existence of the citing paper?

I think it should do more good than harm. The fact that you have been cited and your results extended means that your paper was relevant, which is a good thing. You definitely need to modify the paper though, not only to acknowledge the citing paper, but because you shouldn't publish a conjecture that is now known to be false.

Disclaimer: although I think the citation should help, this may be quite dependent on the particular reviewer(s) you get. The popularization of arXiv has been relatively recent in the CS field, and at least in many subcommunities the issues that come with it are still subject to debate and the "codes of conduct" are a bit blurry.


Why doesn't citation of a book give specific pages? In papers or books, citation to another book usually doesn't contain the specific page, section, chapter of where a result is borrowed. If the book is really thick, and the readers may have different knowledge levels and familiarity with the book, some readers may find it not easy to locate the borrowed result within the reference book. So why don't people specify the source of a citation  as detailed as possible in books?

BTW, it is good to specify as detail as possible for citation to a paper. But since a paper is usually much shorter than a book and it is usually in a searchable electronic form, it may be much easier to find the source in a paper than in a book.

It's always good practice to cite as closely as possible, especially in a book. LaTeX makes it easy to do this with the \cite[]{} form. For a paper, it's often not necessary since one typically cites the main result of a paper. But even with a paper, if what you're citing is a lemma buried inside (and that is not obvious from the abstract) it's good to say [23, Lemma 3.1] or something like that.

As to why people don't do it, AnonymousMathematician already answered that above.


I still do not, exactly, know my field of interest. Is it relevant while applying for PhD? I am in my fourth year of BS-MS course in Physics in India. I will be applying for PhD next year but I do not have a specific topic in my mind.

Until now I have done 2 projects on Cosmology (related to Dark Matter in specific). Right now I have started a project on Semi-Classical gravity, which has been mostly reading work until now. I have liked both topics. I am also being introduced to QFT, Particle Physics this year which also look interesting.

So I do not know what should do my PhD in. Is it necessary for me to pin point my topic of my interest within next 1 year? or Is it fine to have  "Theoretical Physics" as my topic of my interest?

As of now I planning to do my MS thesis on Semi-Classical Gravity so that I'll be able to explore a new topic as well as do something that I like at the same time. Is it necessary for me to decide my Master's thesis based on my potential PhD topic?

I know this field.  Theoretical is enough of a preference for now.  Realistically there are many different areas in physics that rely on conceptual and mathematical ability.  At least you know you don't want to be an experimenter.  If you did, I would think there was a little more importance in having at least an initial hypothesis on what area to go into.  But I think theory is a more flexible, especially for someone new.

P.s.  Don't sleep on theoretical solid state.  E.g. density functional theory.


Who exactly is a pseudo professor? I was recently in a meeting with other university professors and one of them introduced himself as a "pseudo professor". The other, when introducing themselves reiterated that they understand what it means to be a pseudo professor as they have to raise more than 60% of their salary (or loosely pay themselves?). My question then is, who is a pseudo and a 'real' professor? This is in reference to the US higher education system.

This is unlikely to be a formal term anywhere, but a person who does what professors normally do (research, teaching, ...) but without a formal position/job/salary, might well describe themself as a pseudo professor.
Without a formal relationship to a university, they are probably less bound by university regulations, except, perhaps in treatment of students, if any.
Charles Darwin, for example, might be described as a pseudo professor. He had the skills and did the research but wasn't formally related to a university (if I remember correctly).
Industry researchers probably wouldn't so self-describe unless they had some sort of volunteer relationship with a university. "Think of me like a professor, but I'm really not."


Chances at funded cs PhD with high GPA and GRE scores but no research experience or professor connections? I see a lot of questions about grad school prospects with poor grades and/or gre but what about the prospects of getting into a funded PhD program with no research experience or professor connections but good grades and gre quant (3.9 and 165 respectively)?

I graduate in December (BS CompEng from 2nd tier US college) and don't really have time to get interested in undergrad research (though i'd love to but I can't afford to quit my job).  If I just blanket applied to the top 20 CS PhD programs do I have a good chance at picking up decent funding (say $18k+)?

Also is there an online resource to profile what kind of applicants get accepted to which schools?

Edit: I received some good advice but no one has responded to my original question: can I get into a decent funded cs PhD program with good grades and gre while lacking research experience.  I can certainly ask my professors to write letters of recommendation and 'top 20' is a somewhat arbitrary number.  I would really be happy in any school that is actively outputting interesting machine learning or combinatorial optimization research.

Your big challenge—and this would be true regardless of the field—is that you have no "professor connections." This is a major challenge for you, because one of the most important parts of a graduate application is the letters of recommendation. If you don't have people who know you and can vouch for your capability to be a successful graduate student, you're going to have a tough time getting admitted to a graduate school, and especially top-20 programs.

The good news is that in most science and engineering graduate programs, if you do get into a reputable program, you should be able to get a guarantee of funding (either as an RA or TA) for the length of your graduate career (assuming you make "normal progress" and are a good departmental citizen, etc.). I would be leery of accepting an offer from a school that doesn't make such a commitment!


How to design and structure a technical/programming Thesis I'm currently writing my bachelor thesis. The scope of this thesis will be approximately 25-30k words/80-100 pages of content.

We have only written literature reviews during the course of studies so far. My  thesis, however, will be more technical: the thesis will be about an application that I develop.

Since I've mostly done literature reviews before, I have some doubts about the way I've structured/justified the thesis. While I have a (I think) general idea ofhow to go about this thanks to online research and talks with my advisor, I'm not entirely confident that I've understood the "big picture" of writing a thesis that focuses on the development of an application.

Most of the material I've reviewed that deals with application development is relatively short (<10 pages), so the structure of it is hard to apply in my thesis. I have the feeling that, if needed, I could cut down the thesis to about 15 pages. If I wanted to explain all the things that I did during the course of the development, however, I would probably need more than 200 pages.

My first question is: How can I find a good middle ground between those extremes?

Also, I'm a bit confused about how to formulate a solid "contribution to science"-argument for this kind of technical thesis. Going along the lines of "this hasn't been done so far in this way" seems lackluster. Something like "this application can be used by other researchers" also sounds a bit flat, especially considering that this is only a bachelor thesis.

The second question is therefore: How does a good "contribution to science" for this kind of thesis has to be formulated? Which points does it need to address?

You almost certainly should shift the focus - just a little. Do not despair, it's more of seeing everything from a different angle.

Writing a thesis about a piece of software you've created while working on the thesis is at any rate dangerous.  As interesting as it might be (as a study in software engineering, maybe), it looks a little bit like researching a synthetic subject.  Most certainly, no one else will publish "about your software"...

The time-honored approach is to present a hypothesis.  Maybe it's about how some problem can be solved at all/faster than known before/much more elegant.  To achieve a fair and faithful presentation, you will have to write a little about the approach of your predecessors in the field.

Now enter your software.  For the written thesis, it's just a tool to examine your hypothesis.  Writing about some major design decisions should be in order, as long as they are strongly connected to the possibility of testing your hypothesis.

After presenting your newly forged tool, you can delve into test results, and present if they actually support or weaken your initial hypothesis (if there are any surprising results, be sure to mention them, even/especially if they seem to challenge your hypothesis - anything that "will warrant further examination" is good news in research).

This way, you will have created a thesis on a more general subject (using your software as a research tool), and there's your contribution to science, too. Others can check your results, try out and compare their own approaches and so on.  That's why your thesis should be about the problem and your proposed solution and it's properties, not about the tools you've created during that process.


What is the proper action when peers in your field have/are publishing papers with a crucial flaw? I am in an uncomfortable position. I am beginning to do research in a particular area within my field. The body of related works are mostly done by students of a single professor. And, nearly all of it makes a crucial mistake. The works are borrowing/applying concepts and techniques from other, more theoretical and mathematical fields, yet in a way that doesn't make logical sense. Specifically, they are conflating terms, utilizing them as good sounding buzzwords, and (through an incorrect interpretation) as a criterion for the design and value of their techniques.

My work heavily uses the same concepts, yet my arguments are completely contradictory to those of my peers. So I am trying to figure out the best course of action.

I could start by submitting a paper correcting their mistakes, but it would feel a little cruel, and would likely turn my peers against me. I could publish my works, and try to point out their flaws politely, but the flaws are so prevalent that it would still likely cause a lot of discomfort to them. I could send an email to them explaining the problems with their work, but I'm not sure how that would go. It's quite a problem, because it really invalidates the reasoning and conclusions of dozens of papers and even a text book. The professor is distinguished and well known in his field. I really don't want to be the one to stir things up, but the issue must be addressed in some way or another in order for me to publish my work.

This may seem like a cliched answer, but I believe good communication would be key. First off, you need to make absolute sure about whether or not their work represents flaws (preferably with your supervisor).  The next step I believe you should take is to contact the Professor whose team you believe has made such critical mistakes.  Discuss the issue with them and get their perspective.  If, after all of these efforts, you are still absolutely sure that there is a mistake in their work, politely inform them that you disagree with their approach/methods/technique/etc. and that you will be publishing a paper representing a different point of view and approach that presents your argument on the matter.  Mind you, don't ask their permission, it's merely a courtesy so as to show that you don't mean anything personal by it.  After that, publish away.

Finally, I should mention that I feel that there isn't really any issue at all.  If someone got mad at me for publishing a paper that disagreed with their research...that's not exactly a person I would care if they were mad at me or not.  It not only seems excessively petty, but it's also the nature of scientific research.  Great ideas and solid theories get overturned and refuted on a regular basis.  If your counterpoint to their research is solid enough to be published in a good journal, then it's good enough for them to read and consider without getting unnecessarily angry.


Can I present the results of a paper that is currently under review? Among the presentations in a major conference, I attended one where the author cited a paper (of theirs) under review in another major conference. Not only cited it, but showed some of its results.

I have the impression that it should not be possible, since there's the potential risk of influencing reviewers who could also be in the room during the presentation. Or is it only "good practice" not to do so?

The only problem of presenting results that are not published is if someone else steals the results and writes their own paper about them. (Though this probably more likely only happens with ideas that are shared too prematurely.)

It is generally considered a good thing to promote one’s own work, and one way of doing this is by giving presentations at other universities.

Even if this work is under review at a different conference, I don’t think it is problematic. When presenting a paper at a conference, you are not necessarily obliged to talk about precisely the contents of the paper. You are advertising the paper, and more generally, your own work, so that people will read it and cite it. If you have bigger and better results, then these will help with your promotion of your own work.

Of course it would be weird, though probably not wrong, to talk entirely about a different paper when presenting at a conference.


As a recent PhD entering jobhunt, should I agree to host a weekly seminar? I recently graduated and am temporarily employed as a lecturer at the school I graduated from (9 hours a week of teaching, not counting prep time).  There's a weekly seminar on my field of interest, and I've been asked to take over hosting it.  This would involve handling various logistics like planning the meetings, planning lunches, booking the room, etc. etc.  It would be a lot of work...  On the other hand it might be a neat opportunity to network/make connections/etc., but not that much better than the opportunity one would get just by attending the seminar.

Should I do it or should I save that time for working on my own research/jobhunting?

It's in your interest to focus on research, then job search, then teaching, then service. This is service, so lowest priority. See if you can get a student assistant (grad or undergrad) to do a lot of the grunt work, while you handle the higher level logistical stuff. If you can't get some help, doesn't sound like it's worth your time.


Is relocation assistance offered to postdocs? Do universities offer relocation assistance to a newly employed postdoc who comes from another country? Is it appropriate for the postdoc to ask for relocation assistance if it is not already offered?

It varies. In my experience some of the more prestigious postdoctoral fellowships sponsored by universities might have some amount of moving expenses built into the budget, and more typical postdoc positions funded out of grants probably won't. But it might be possible to get a professor to help you out, perhaps out of startup or some other funds that aren't earmarked for a particular purpose. You should try to negotiate it with the person who offers you the job before you accept the offer.


Penalties for disclosing student grades without consent Is it illegal to share students' grades with somebody else (e.g their parents) without their consent in the US? What are the most common penalties for such a violation of privacy? Is jail time possible as a punishment?

In the US the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) protects the privacy of students. This "act" is not a law (on further reading it is a law), but rather a stipulation by the Department of Education that universities must obey in order to receive funding. As such, I do not believe that violations are classed as a criminal offense and hence cannot lead to jail time. Universities which violate the FERPA can lose their funding and likely have grounds to dismiss employees who violate the act. The university might even be able to seek damages against those individuals, but again, not jail time.

I would suggest that you not violate FERPA. If you intend to, or have done so (accidentally or otherwise), I suggest that you seek legal advice.


What is the proper way to ask a professor to be your PhD supervisor? I sent an e-mail to a professor that I did undergraduate research about 9-10 years ago wondering if he could write a letter of recommendation.  He replied saying that he didn't think he would have anything meaningful to say, which is completely understandable. I didn't really do any publication with the undergraduate research, but I did something that he called a sanity-check, which was work on a coding assignment on developing a Distributed File System using FUSE.  The idea was that if an undergrad can do it, then the grad students should be able to do it.

He also asked if I submitted anything to him.  I sent a reply on two e-books I published.  One of the e-books was referenced in a Russian Defcon (I didn't write it in Russian).  I also sent him a link to my blog.  After that, I asked if he could be a Ph.D supervisor.

I should have asked here before sending him the e-mail though.  I'm not really sure if this is the appropriate way to go about finding a Ph.D supervisor.

I don't think that your approach is not good.
It is always preferred to be straight to the point with direct focus on your aims and how would they fit into your potential hosting lab vision and goals.

Always, Keep It Short and Simple (this is called KISS principle).

However,
Some suggestions to enhance your odds:

0- Set your objectives and your target areas.

1- Get prepared by identifying your potential advisor' research interests by visiting his web site and his lab activities to see if it's fit to your needs.

2- Make a balance sheet between your strengths and weaknesses.
Don't be shy to identify your weaknesses, because you shall be providing an improvement plan on how to address them.

3- Try to come up and suggest some research topic that sticks with your potential advisors research interests.

Like this, your advisor will be more than glad to offer his/her expertise and embrace your proposal.

I believe by doing the aforementioned steps, you show that you are already on your way to a PhD. Such thing would be visible to your potential advisor and would be certainly appreciated.

Good luck.


Can a postdoc change his/her supervisor in Sweden? In Sweden, a PhD student can change its supervisor according to the higher education rules and regulations. They actually have quite a lot of rights during their studies. I wanted to know if this is also the case for a Postdoc working at a Swedish university?
Note that this question is purely about the legal aspects of the matter.

(I'm faculty at Chalmers University of Technology, a well-known private university in Gothenburg, Sweden)

The pragmatic question (whether it's a good idea to change supervisors mid-flight) is covered well by posdef, I'll focus on the legal angle here.

As you mention, PhD students have quite some rights in Sweden, but this is mostly because they are in a special type of employment largely governed by Swedish university law. This is not the case for postdocs - postdocs aren't students and they are not faculty (for which the law also knows some special privileges). Fundamentally, postdocs are just "employees", similar to research engineers, secretaries, or university accountants, and hence their tasks, rights, and privileges are exactly what the university has defined in their job profile. At Chalmers, I am not aware that there is any formalized "right" to be assigned a different supervisor. I suspect the situation in other universities is similar, but you may want to check your own contract first.

That said, and to echo the other answers a little, changing your supervisor is hard. Really hard. Even as a PhD student, when the law is on your side. Funding is a huge issue, but so is the fact that faculty tends to be sceptical of taking on students/employees where one of their colleagues has already made bad experiences. As always, there are exceptions, but in general you should figure out which faculty would take you on and take over your funding before talking publicly about changing supervisors. It's better to have a normal working relation with a supervisor that is not ideal, than to have an advisor who has been assigned by the department because nobody else took you on.


How to sell my skills in a research statement I am a postdoc currently on the academic job market who does interdisciplinary work. My phd is in mathematical physics, granted by a physics department, while working with a research group technically within a computer science department. I do work in quantum computation and lean heavily towards mathematics, unlike many researchers in QC. I publish in all of mathematics, physics, and computer science. There is a body of mathematical knowledge lacking in the topic that I study and, therefore, I work on both building and exploiting the necessary math from the ground up.

I'm reworking my research statement and will be applying to positions in all of mathematics, physics, and computer science. Should I be writing different research statements targeted at each department or will one statement that summarizes my overarching project suffice? Also, will describing myself as a mathematical physicist (as opposed to a mathematician or computer scientist) hurt me when applying to jobs outside of physics proper.

What you write should depend in part on the type of job and the type of institution you are applying for.

To apply for a research focused position in a high level research institution, your statement should reflect something about your suitability to work with them explicitly. So different statements for different institutions would be warranted in that case. Each with a different focus, but also showing how your other interests support your work in that primary field.

For a more general position, say one that involves as much teaching as research, or the research requirements are more "casual", a general statement would probably be better as it shows flexibility that the institution might value.

But in general, make it about how you fit the needs of the position.


Important factors for hiring a young mathematician Let's list important factors for evaluation of a job candidate (for research post doc, assistant professor, tenure track, etc):

Research experience (research articles, research talks, expository articles, perhaps books).
Teaching experience (tutoring, undergraduate courses, graduate courses, etc).
Academic background (grades, the university of graduation, current affiliation, etc).
Reference (who is writing reference letter and how he is writing it).
Personal (natural) features (nationality, race, language, etc).
Social and family status (connections, marriage, etc).
Other factors (you name it).

I have been in job market for several years. I was always wondering how do the above factors affect my job application in different academic institutions? I would like to know the approximate percentage of importance of these factors in different institutions.

And my second question is How the hiring committees evaluate a candidate? Is it based on reference letters, CV, list of publications, research statement, teaching statement?

My impression is reference letters are very important at least for the first job after PhD. Am I right?

I don't have anything essentially divergent to say from the other answers, but since you inquired about mathematics specifically and I am a mathematician who has been (and currently am) involved in postdoctoral and tenure track hiring, I thought it might be useful for me to weigh in as well.  Lacking true inspiration, let me just comment on your criteria.
(Let me also assume that we are talking about jobs at a "research university", as it seems you are.)

Research experience (research articles, research talks, expository articles, perhaps books).

Mathematicians are judged on a combination of research promise and research success: as you get older, one looks increasingly for evidence that the former has been converted into the latter.  However, for every kind of research job in mathematics, they are hiring you on the basis of the work they expect you to do in the future.  So, for instance, if you have already solved a major problem, you can coast on that for a time but after a while people want to hear what you are working on now.  Research talks are probably the best way of exploring the dichotomy between past and future research: as such, they are very important whenever they exist, which is almost always on the tenure track job market and in a small (but perhaps increasing?) minority of postdoctoral jobs.
Expository articles generally do not count towards the research component of your application.  (If someone is counting papers, then if you have 8 research papers and 1 expository paper then people will probably say you have 9 papers altogether, so it counts a little bit.  But if pressed, its value could contract considerably: e.g. if there are worries that a candidate has too few papers, than a paper viewed as expository will probably not allay this worry.) Strategically it is probably best to advertise expository articles as having some teaching / mentoring / service component, if at all possible.
With regard to writing books: one of my most distinguished colleagues, Dino Lorenzini, wrote an excellent and rather successful book near the beginning of his career.  He now tells anyone who will listen that junior faculty should not write books.  Of course sometimes the heart wants what it wants, but from a strategic perspective I think this is eminently sound, and I say this as someone who may turn around and write some books now that I am solidly into my mid-career.

Teaching experience (tutoring, undergraduate courses, graduate courses, etc).

Successful teaching experiences are indeed valued for a research job.  At most research universities teaching is still a main component of one's job and, especially, of one's promotion and tenure packages.  Most research departments are looking most of the time for thoroughly solid teachers rather than especially brilliant or innovative ones.  Your teaching dossier should convey most of all that the department who hires you will never have to think about your teaching in a negative way.
Some graduate students do not get to do instruction at all (as opposed to TA work: grading, leading problem sessions, and so forth).  There is a big difference between TA work and instruction, and as a hirer I am very wary of candidates who attempt to convince me that they will be a successful instructor based only on TA experience.  I would strongly advise every math graduate student to be the instructor of record for at least one successful undergraduate course (where "successful" means you can get a strong teaching letter out of the experience).
Teaching experience at the graduate level is almost unheard of for graduate students and is far from guaranteed in postdocs.  Even within my own department, some of my colleagues feel strongly that postdocs should teach topics graduate courses in their areas of interest, whereas other colleagues feel that it is the job of the tenure track faculty to teach these courses.  I lean more towards the latter, and I don't feel that teaching graduate courses is an important part of a tenure track job application: I would be equally impressed or more with other kinds of interactions with the graduate program, e.g. participating in or organizing seminars, reading theses, and so forth.
I'm having a hard time thinking about how tutoring experience could play a significant role.  If you have founded the Khan Academy or the Euclid Lab, you would probably get some attention / consideration for this.  Much less and your employers are unlikely to care.

Academic background (grades, the university of graduation, current affiliation, etc).

No research university that I know of asks for grades or transcripts for candidates for faculty positions.  Of course your pedigree -- i.e., where you did your undergraduate and graduate work, and your current institution -- is of some importance, but not that much importance.  Anyway, what's done is done here: presumably you took what opportunities you could to attend / work at better, rather than worse, institutions!

Reference (who is writing reference letter and how he is writing it).

Or she!  When you are applying for your first postdoc, your adviser's letter may well be the most important part of the application: most graduates, even very strong ones, cannot speak about their research accomplishments and near future goals as convincingly as their advisers can.  Later on your adviser's letter gets less important, but you probably get more letters overall, and they are always a key part of the application.

Personal (natural) features (nationality, race, language, etc).

In the United States it is illegal to discriminate on the basis of race.  Nationality is probably a no-go as well.  Language issues are important: if English is not your native language, employers will (or at any rate, should) look carefully at your skills.

Social and family status (connections, marriage, etc).

Professional connections can be important; e.g. they come out in recommendation letters and in your academic pedigree.  It is illegal for employers to inquire about your marital status, sexual orientation, or whether you have children.  It is not illegal for you to bring these things up, and if you have a "two-body problem" -- i.e., a partner who is also an academic -- than you should do so at some point, and that brings an extra layer of complication to the process.  But if a candidate is not looking for an academic job for her partner, I honestly don't care at all whether she is married, gay, celibate, and so forth.  I can assure you that in most American departments any such talk about these matters in the context of a hiring discussion would be rapidly quelled.


Is sending a CV with recommendation letter a good idea? My coworker requested me to write a recommendation letter for an academic position  (postdoc). I myself am a postdoc, and afraid that my name may not be known well enough.

In order to support my credentials, I was thinking of either including a short bio or attaching a full CV with my recommendation letter. Is this a bad idea?

It's a little unusual. Typically you insert relevant material into the letter. Something like

  Dear So and So,
      I'm awesome in these 10 different ways

  Now let me tell you about Candidate.


Withdrawing an article out for review when another journal posts a call for papers for a special issue that is right on topic? I've recently sent out an article for review. I've been in email contact with the editor from journal #1 from the start, and was quite up-front that I wasn't sure whether or not my article would be a good match for their journal (in methodology, yes; in century and author focus, not so much). Today, I found a special issues CFP in journal#2 where my article would be extremely relevant. Their deadline is end of January.

I'm considering contacting journal #1 to see if they've started the review process, explain that I've found what may be a much better match for my article, and ask about withdrawing my submission if the review process has not begun.

Is this frowned upon?

Of course, I feel like I'm playing with fire here. What if I withdraw, resubmit to journal #2, article does not get accepted, then... go back to journal #1 with tail between legs.

Any advice?

I would suggest the following steps:

Ask journal #1 if the review process has started.
If it has not yet started, ask if it can be kept on hold for a few days.
Meanwhile send a pre-submission inquiry to journal #2.
If journal #2 seems positive about your paper, send a request to withdraw the paper from journal #1.
Be honest about your reason for withdrawal, and add a word of appreciation for the editor's cooperation and understanding.
Submit to journal #2 once the withdrawal is confirmed.

If the review process has started, it would be advisable to let things be and not withdraw from journal #1. If your paper is rejected from journal #2, you could consider submitting it to another journal rather than going back to journal #1.


When citing a thesis, do I list supervisors as coauthors? I am citing someone's bachelors thesis, and someone else's PhD thesis. Do I include the supervisors for each of these works as a coauthor of the thesis?

When citing, you should include the document's author(s). For a thesis, that'll be a single author. You needn't name any other contributors, e.g., any supervisors.


How much value is given to a recommendation letter written by a foreign professor? (Grad school/math) I'm about to finish my undergraduate degree in mathematics in France, and expect to be close to the top of my class in a top university here.  Next academic year, I will be studying for a master's at UPMC (Pierre and Marie Curie University).  I intend to apply for PhD programmes in the US or the UK.

Since I will be only a few months into my master's program when I apply, I expect that some of my letters will be from my undergraduate professors.  The head of the math department and a professor I've had for over a year said they would write letters for me, but neither one of them have published anything in the past decade.

How much value is given by the admission program to a letter of recommendation written by a teacher at a foreign university?

The letter being from a foreign university will not itself be a big problem.  I think there's always some difficulty switching systems.  The most important qualification which might not be obvious (I treat a general high profile and knowing you well as obvious) is that they should be able to convince the reader that they have a good sense that they know what it takes for a student to succeed in the program they are applying to.  On average, professors in France are less familiar with US or UK graduate programs than US or UK professors are, so they have a bit less authority on that topic.  That's not a huge problem if the letter is otherwise good, though.

I'm actually much more concerned by you saying that they haven't published in a decade.  If they really are unknown to the admissions committees that is not good.  You might actually ask them if there are any places in the US or UK where they know people well, and where previous students they've written letters for have gone.  You don't have to go to those places (though it's worth thinking about), but if the answer really is that there aren't any, that's a big red flag, and you might think a bit harder about the professors at UPMC (which does have a pretty high international profile).


Are the IEEE Standardized Keywords Madatory For The Index Terms Section? In an IEEE paper template, it has been mentioned that "Keywords should be taken from the taxonomy" and they gave a list of keywords, they have also mentioned elsewhere that these keywords can make an article more easily and reliably discoverable. However, I'm not quite sure whether they are mandatory or not.

If you log into the target journal in IEEE, go to your author center, and click on "start a new submission". On the next page, click the button "Begin Submission". Click on "Step 3: Attributes". This will show you what keywords are required, and how many (look for the "required : X. Max Y") to the right of the Keyword entry. IEEE seems to require between 1 and 3 keywords, and the list could be different per journal. Some also let you enter your own.

You can either keep that draft and use it for your submission, or just delete it when you are done.

If you want to identify the journal, I could give you specifics.


What is the difference in research culture between a University of X and a X University of Technology? In various parts of Europe (even in Israel) I see that there are two types of universities:

University of 'X'
'X' University of Technology

where X is the name of a city.

The main difference I discovered is: #2 offers more jobs in the industry, but #1 offers more research opportunity.

Do they follow different types of cultures in terms of teaching and research? Do they follow different quality standards?

Historically speaking, it's possible there would have been differences between what the universities researched or were built to research and thus were given different names. However, research directions and capabilities change over time and I don't think it's possible to draw such distinctions based on name alone these days. Research "quality" or "standards" can also be somewhat subjective, and will definitely vary from country to country.


Recommendation Letter Request: No response I am applying to graduate school, and I am having a problem with recommendation letters. I need three recommendation letters with two of them being academic reference letters. Honestly, last year, I had requested two recommendation letters from two of my former professors for my law school applications. However, in the end, I decided not to pursue law school for a number of reasons, despite being accepted to one. Currently, I am applying to a number of different schools' masters' programs in the field I plan to study.

As I mentioned earlier, I am having difficulty with the recommendation letter process. I wrote emails to those two professors about my situation, and one professor was willing to revise her former recommendation letter for my new masters' programs applications. However, I have yet to hear back from the other professor. I had written a senior thesis under that professor, and I was hoping to receive a letter from him. After I sent an email to that professor a few weeks ago, and received no response, I sent him a follow-up email yesterday. I received no response to that follow-up email either. If there is no response, does that mean a discreet "no"? Should I send another follow-up email a few days later? Or, should I find another academic recommender at this point? My first application deadline is in the middle of December.

I am not in your field. But from a faculty's perspective, the lack of response does not necessarily entail that the professor is unwilling to write a recommendation letter for you. A faculty's life is much busier than you think (this is something I did not know/agree when I was still young and crazy); it is possible that the professor forgot to get back to you and/or that s/he is currently out of touch. If I were you, I would wait for a day or two and would send a polite email telling the professor that you decide to seek for help from from another person due to time constraint (and this is exactly what you need to do in order to ensure that the universities you are applying to receive all of your application materials on time and to give another person sufficient time to work on your recommendation letter).


How to conduct research as a non-Latino in a Latino-studies research institute? I will be conducting research in a Latino-studies research institute next summer. I will probably be the only non-Latino researcher in the institute that summer. I’m also approaching my research from a computational sociological point of view, which is vastly different from the qualitative orientation of my peers’ research. I do wish to explore the field of Latino studies more and possibly even conduct research in it (of course as a respectful student who is outside the culture).

How can I not only conduct research but move up more into this world of Latino studies research without being disrespectful and giving precedence to those who not only research Latino studies, but are part of the culture?

Congratulations on your upcoming research position! I understand why you might be nervous, especially since you expect to have two major differences with all your coworkers (ethnicity and methodology). Quantitative researchers are often treated as if they have higher status than their qualitative counterparts (funding discrepancies, accessibility of their research to colleagues in STEM fields, ability to "dabble" or "consult" in different situations without as much background knowledge, easy transfer of skills to jobs outside academia). So, you have (at least) two areas, central to your job, where it may be hard to communicate with coworkers and where you may have had very different experiences you're working from.

Here are a few things to keep in mind:

Your coworkers will (presumably) all be from different backgrounds. Even setting aside migration-related cultural differences, there are very different cultures across different parts of Latin America and the Caribbean, and the extent to which people identify with indigenous heritage will also add diversity. Afro-Cuban religion, Andean culture, the Chican@ movement, and Brazilian social stratification are in the background of Latino studies, and probably none of your colleagues will have lived cultural experience with all of them.
That said, it is entirely possible that many people will feel comfortable chatting in Spanish or Spanglish, or making cultural references you don't know. It may be valuable to brush up on your Spanish and brush up on whatever Latino culture is local to where you are. (For instance, you might see if there are guest speakers or film nights at a cultural center on campus or arranged by your school's Latino studies program.)
(I am white and non-Hispanic.) I grew up with the idea that there was no longer racism in American society and that most apparent continuing racial differences were attributable to economic factors. In college, I learned from African American friends that yes, racism persists. In graduate school, I learned from the social science literature and colleagues' research that race definitely matters. Stated in the most conservative way, even after accounting for many, many other factors, race and ethnicity still help predict many life outcomes in modern America.

Racism is an active factor in society. Shaun Harper writes in his 2012 paper "Race without Racism: How Higher Education Researchers Minimize Racist Institutional Norms":

  I do not believe that every racial disparity or negative experience a minoritized person has is attributable to racism. However, ... most higher education scholars rely on everything but racism in their attempts to explain, theorize about, and discuss findings that emerge in their race-related studies. This trend is consistent with approaches sociologists commonly employ in their research (Bonilla-Silva & Baiocchi, 2001). (pp. 22-23)

There are many barriers that your colleagues have faced to get where they are. In this very readable article, Harper and Charles Davis III present "Eight Actions to Reduce Racism in College Classrooms," and they will probably be good to think about for a scholarly research environment, too.
Let's say that something you say is (mis)perceived as racist. It's hard to talk about race, and your job will involve talking about ethnicity and (likely) race. So you may want to think about what happens if you say the wrong thing and/or someone calls you out. This blog post, "My Fellow White People, Here's One Simple Trick You Can Do About Racism TODAY!" covers this situation. (You did not mention your racial/ethnic background beyond being non-Latino; however, at least some of the advice may apply even if you are often minoritized yourself.)
Show interest in your colleagues' research and methodologies. If any of them study/studied at the same place you do, ask for course recommendations.
If they are interested in your computational sociology, help them understand it, and (if appropriate) recommend resources they might benefit from.
Make sure that your research is written in a way that qualitative sociologists can fully engage with it, and help de-mystify quantitative work.
As in any position like this, remember that you're new but that you have interesting ideas. (If you tend to be more outspoken, use this to hang back more at the start. If you tend to be quiet, use this to speak up.) Talk with your advisor/boss/PI if you have questions about things, including office culture.
For the longer-term goals, your work at this institute is a good start. Be open to mixed-methods collaborations with the colleagues you meet here; many of them will probably work in fascinating settings and may have the opportunity to collect novel quantitative datasets alongside their detailed qualitative work.

Finally, here are some lengthier suggested readings:

Edward Bonilla-Silva's Racism without Racists: Color-blind racism and the persistence of racial inequality in America
Tufuku Zuberi and Bonilla-Silva's White Logic, White Methods: Racism and Methodology
Acquaint yourself with the Culture of Poverty debate and its modern versions.
Acquaint yourself with the work of the top scholars at the institute.


Change from one PhD-Program to a much more prestigious (and better paid) new program at my institution I started my PhD last year in November. I've now heard of an incredibly attractive program that is just starting this autumn, with insanely good working condition (the salary is basically twice as high as my current salary and there are also nice internship options, which my program completely lacks.) My PhD advisor actually also participates in the program as an advisor. Thematically it is very close to what I am working on currently. I'm not unhappy with my current position or working environment.

Is it advisable to talk to my advisor about applying for this program? Of course, it is not very likely that I would even be admitted to the program, but it is so attractive, that not applying seems stupid. For different reasons, even though my advisor also participates in the program, I would not be able to apply for a position supervised by him.

I would have definitely applied for this program, had it existed last year. Also, when I started my PhD I did have the clear intention of finishing it, so some possibly related questions do not apply here.

Just talk to your advisor. Since he participates in the program, he will know if you are qualified to apply and stand a chance of getting the position. He will probably also be able to tell you if the two of you will be able to continue working together – after all, it's far from unheard of that a PhD student has a nominal advisor for administrative reasons but a "real" co-advisor who is responsible for the day-to-day research.

In any case, it seems completely unlikely that you would get the position without support from your current advisor. If anything, it's probably that you will need letters of recommendations, and an application without a good letter from your current advisor is an application that is headed for the trashcan.

Just go see him in person – I would avoid email – and start a conversation with "I heard about this new PhD program with much better conditions than the one I have, do you think I could get into it and still continue working with you?". Then see where it takes you. Maybe your advisor knows a reason that would prevent you from applying altogether and you are fretting over nothing. Or on the contrary you are the perfect applicant and you will start earning twice your current salary in a few months. Until you talk with him, you don't know.


Would it annoy a professor if a student does not reply their email concerning the career development of the student? I asked professors for recommendation letters this past year for grad school applications. I got into one school, but I’ve decided to put off going due to the coronavirus (the program was going to be online). Also, secretly, I decided I should be pursuing a different path after a lot more reflection.
All of my professors I asked for letters, understandably, told me to let them know what I end up doing. I haven’t yet. Will they be pissed off if I tell them about my change of plans? Should I just not email at all?
I do feel bad having had them write letters that ultimately will not be used.

If you find a productive path then the professors will be happy to know.
They probably don’t keep a list of reference leters with “got a job” or “not got a job”... At least I don’t...
Just nice to get an email from a student from 2, 5 or more years ago with an update.


To become a professor of actuarial science, should I pursue graduate school immediately after B.S. or get some professional experience first? I graduated with a B.S. in statistics earlier this year and have been working as an actuary for the past two months. In all honesty, I'm not very happy with the job position in the little amount of time I've been working at it. I am very close to becoming a credentialed actuary (ASA for those of you who have heard of it) and anticipate making a decision on whether or not I should leave later this year.

My dream is to become an actuarial science professor. I am really wondering whether I should pursue graduate school in statistics or just stick it out until I get a decade or so of experience (as every other actuarial professor I've seen has done).

I do realize that the Actuarial Outpost exists, but typically, actuaries tend to discourage people who want to pursue Ph.D. degrees.

The work experience would be helpful in an academic career. But it doesn't have to be one decade. More like one to two years.

Many people stay with accounting firms for 1-2 years just to get their CPA. You could benefit from the ASA. So stick around long enough to get it, then start looking to leave when you do.


Should co-author mention you in talk-abstract Simple question:

Suppose you have a joint work with another guy, and both of you agree that it is truly joint (i.e. both of you believe and agree there has been equally fundamental ideas for the papers from both sides, and also that there has been equal effort in realizing the project)

Now the guy does a presentation at a conference where in the abstract of the presentation he does not mention your name by the ritual ''this is joint work with...''. The organizer of the seminar is aware that it is joint and the abstract get modified after few days with your name.

Later on after few months, at another, way bigger conference, the guy does precisely the same thing (no mention to your name in the abstract), and there that is how the abstract passes.

My question: Is this considered an unethical behavior? In my position, would be the right thing to do to mail the coauthor to tell him that what he did is not acceptable?

Why do I find this puzzling: on one hand it just bothers me to see that someone who is presenting a work where I gave key ideas does not mention me at all in the abstract, since it feels wrong and pushy in a nasty sense. On the other I have the doubt that I might be over-reacting and that the etiquette does not banish such a behavior.

Fields of studies: math.

Edit: to make clearer the spirit of the question, from a comment below. In the top paragraph I mean that the two of us had a conversation and we agreed that the contribution to the paper in terms of ideas and practical effort in realizing the project is divided in equal parts. But then, asymmetrically, my name disappears when he gives talks on it. Therefore I cannot conclude that he does it because he believes that he has done more. So two options are left:
1) It is not part of the etiquette to write your co-author name in abstract of talks, so he just did not bother.
2) It is, but he did not do it because he wants to get more credit from people just looking at abstracts (is a big conference).
So a positive answer to 1) would make not necessary the conclusion 2), which would be a relief, since 2) feels really nasty.

p.p.s: observe that the option 3) that one does not know that it is etiquette is excluded by the fact that many people actually write it in the abstract, the guy is aware of it, and therefore in the doubt it would be more convenient to choose the option without negative consequences. Therefore the omission can be only justified by the knowledge that it is not etiquette, that is 1).

I would say it's certainly inconsiderate, but I don't know if I'd go so far as to say "unethical", as long as you are credited in the talk itself.

Rather than telling your coauthor it's "unacceptable" to leave it out, he would be able to save face if you treat it as a simple oversight, whether or not you really believe that it is.  (Even careful people make mistakes, and I am always in favor of applying Hanlon's razor.)

  Hey, I saw your abstract for conference XXX.  It looks like a very nice venue to discuss our work.  One thing: it looks from the other abstracts like this conference follows the usual convention of mentioning coauthors in the abstract ("this is joint work with...") and it looks like this is missing from yours.  If it isn't too much trouble, would you still be able to add it?  I would really appreciate it.


Should I cite photos in my thesis? If I use photos in my thesis that I found on Internet, should I cite them? If so, how should the photos be cited? Should I write something like "In Figure 4.5 [9]" or should I cite it in the Appendix? Or should I add the source in the caption?

You must cite them!

Failure to cite photographs and figures is just as much plagiarism as stealing quotations. To some extent, it is tougher to use pictures from other sources, because you need to make sure you have the permissions to use them.

You should add the citation in the caption, as well as the requisite acknowledgments required by the author or publisher.


Which year can I start to apply graduate program in United States? As the question stated, is it possible for me to start applying graduate programs during forth year of undergraduate studies?

What matters is whether you will have completed your undergraduate degree before the graduate program starts.

For example, suppose there is a program with application deadline December 2017, with enrollment in September 2018.  You can apply this year as long as you expect to finish your undergraduate degree before September 2018.  So if this is your last year and you expect to graduate in spring 2018, you can apply this year.

For students on a traditional US schedule, this would usually be the fourth year of their undergraduate studies.  But some students might be finishing their undergraduate degree in a shorter or longer period of time.  E.g. if this is your fourth year as an undergrad, but you expect to need one more year to finish and will graduate in spring 2019, then do not apply to graduate programs this year.


Is Australian Business Deans Council Journal Quality List 2013 a good metric to ascertain journal quality? I found some discussion on how one should avoid journals on Beall's list.

Related: How do you judge the quality of a journal?

I wish to know about other such lists to ascertain good journals.

Specifically, is ABDC 2013 a good list to assess journal quality ?

Thanks.

It depends what you mean by 'quality'.

I would argue the very notion of ranking journals as this list does is deeply unsound [see Brembs, Button, Munafò (2013)]. The quality of content in most academic journals is variable. Great articles can be found amongst the mediocre, and likewise mediocre articles can hide in issues full of high-quality articles.

Journals are a lazy proxy for the evaluation of 'quality' of content.


How to find the paper that initializes a new field Problem

I am now working on a relatively new field in machine learning. My advisor suggested me to read milestone papers in this field. I think The first paper that proposed the problem is surely an important one. However, I do not know how to find it even after reading several review papers (actually none of them mentions the origin of the field).

Though finding the origin of the field may not sound useful, it is important to me since I have some fundamental doubts about the problem description, etc.

Could anyone help me, thank you in advance.

THe Wikipedia article on this topic is reasonably good and has some references.  I would look at that article and the references within.
Try tracing back "references of references" of reviews or important papers.  (You don't have to read in depth.)  But you may figure out the better papers.  May also find those that have a perspective on (3).
In general, I think "machine learning" is a misnomer and a buzzword.  Talking about it as some organic "thing" is not correct.  You should see it as a bit of a fad (especially the use of the term) and within the broader fields of statistics, algorithms, optimization, etc.  It's not like discovering X-rays or something.


If co-instructors gave different syllabi with different grading schemes, is this generally considered a valid reason to challenge grade? Summary: I am a STEM graduate student taking a soon-ending class that was divided into 3 parts each under different professors, Alice, Bob and Carol.

There is a conflict in the grading schemes set forth by the different professors' syllabuses (plural).  Omitting most of the details as being too specific, the result is that one syllabus will grade more harshly than the other, and that is the syllabus that they are proposing to use for the final grades.

Given my current grade, I will pass the course either way. That said, I believe I can make a case that the professors should follow the more generous grading scheme, which would benefit me significantly. Is conflicting grading schemes across different syllabi generally considered a valid reason to challenge a grade?

The majority of the question's text concerns minutiae about syllabi and percentages that are unlikely to be of interest to anyone except the OP.  The question would be significantly improved by eliding / summarizing this information and concentrating on the core question:

  What happens when multiple, conflicting syllabi are given out for the same course?  Does the student have a legitimate grievance when one syllabus is being followed but not the other, at the expense of his grade?

I think these are reasonable questions for our site.

My answer to the first question is: yikes.  Three different instructors for the same course, three different syllabi, and one of the instructors (the chair!) does not even know about both of the other syllabi?  What a mess.  In general having courses taught by more than one faculty member makes things harder and necessitates much more explicit, advanced planning.  This course does not sound well-planned.  As soon as you get talk about which syllabus is more "official" than the others, things are not going well.  I don't think there is a standard, easy answer to this question, and I don't see any coherent answer which does not admit mistakes on the part of the faculty.  On the other hand I wonder why this issue did not come up earlier in the course: on the first day of class every student was in possession of two contradictory syllabi and no one noticed?  I find that curious and am not sure what to make of it.

My answer to the second question is: yes, I think so.  If you show up to some higher administrative official with two syllabi in hand and say that you want to be held to the standard of the syllabus you were given first, you have a good shot at getting some traction on this.  However I would encourage you to try to resolve the matter as non-combatively as possible: if you are a graduate student in the program, getting the chair chewed out by (say) her dean is likely to have some effect on your course grade, but it may have other, less pleasant effects down the line.  I would begin by doing what you have already done: clearly pointing out the discrepancy between the two syllabi and the significant effect it may/will have on your course grade.  You should indicate that you proceeded in the course with an understanding based on the first syllabus that you received and that you would like this to be taken into account in the course grade.  Give them a chance to do this for you before you escalate the situation.

Finally, the business about the 75 belonging to two grade ranges: in my opinion you look petty by bringing that up at all (look at the reaction your question has received).  The purpose of the grading system being spelled out in advance is for students to be sure they are treated fairly and to be able to have some rough means of predicting what kind of performance will lead to what kind of grade.  There is nothing that you or any student would have done differently if 75 belongs to one grade range rather than the other.  I agree with other commenters who said that the time you spent complaining about that would be better spent learning the material and improving your performance in the course.  Mixing legitimate, serious grading concerns with "grade-grubbing" is not a good strategy.


Applied vs Theoretical Journals (or venues) This question is primarily for the Math/TCS/Systems community. I expect that similar situations (theory vs practice/applied journals) arises in other context as well so feel free to comment what is going on in your field. Also, it is not exclusive to journals.

I have what is in my opinion a good theoretical/algorithmic result that has many applications to system stuff like cloud computing/fault tolerant stuff etc. The paper is theoretical nevertheless, without experiments etc.
I have two options:

submit it to a good TCS journal (DAM/Algorithmica etc) without caring too much for applications and focus purely on the math stuff.
Submit it to a more "system" journal (for example IEEE/ACM TON/ToPDS or Journal of Par. Dist. Comput. etc). Such journals could accept, on principle, more algorithmic results provided they have clear real world applications relevant to the scope of the journal.

My question to the TCS community:  How bad/good looks on the CV a theoretical result on a -nevertheless good- system journal but not so visible to the TCS/Math community?

My question to the System community: How do you react when you see such a pure algorithmic result in such a journal? Even if it is motivated by real life system applications.

My question to the Industry people: Does it make more sense for my CV to demonstrate that I can publish to more system journals (like the above). How do you act when you receive application from TCS people?

The last question is in purpose general. Depends the position. But do some publications in more practical journal give extra credit to the applicant?

Update: For what is worth, in case anyone is interested I can share my mild experience. I submitted to a (prestigious, if it matters) system journal my work (which is rather heavy from technical/math point of view). The paper got accepted, but it strikes me that none of the reviewers spent time on the technical part (at least not very carefully). They rather cared on the applications part (and they were happy with it). I am a little disappointed since I expected people to check the math part, and this makes me a bit reluctant to try similar journals in the future.

Still, my question stands: How does it look on the CV from a TCS/Math point of view? Does it make any difference (positive or negative)? Does it look "suspicious" that I have chosen a system journal when I could perfectly choose an algorithmic/applied math one? The reason I did that, is because I wanted to show a little bit of "diversity" in my CV (plus the fact that I like systems in general). Does it make any sense?

This is not a direct answer, as I do not have that much experience with work crossing the theory/systems divide. I do have experience with the theory/bioinformatics divide, which is quite similar.

First, the publication venue should be chosen according to the intended target audience. If you believe your work is directly relevant to a community, you should publish it for that community. If it is only potentially relevant, you should probably publish it elsewhere.

I frequently read algorithmic papers published in theoretical algorithms, algorithm engineering, and bioinformatics. The fields have very different standards for what constitutes a good algorithmic paper. Proofs and analysis are the primary content in a theoretical paper. Experimental evaluation, if present, is considered secondary. The situation is reversed in algorithm engineering. As a result, a good algorithm in one field is often not that good in the other.

Things get a bit weird in bioinformatics. The algorithm itself is secondary content, as people are more interested in the problem you study and whether you have biologically interesting results. An algorithm is good, if it solves a relevant problem in practice. There are some bioinformatics papers with plenty of mathematical content, but they are exceptions. Proofs are seen more as technical details better suited to the supplementary material than as scientific contributions. Hence the reviewers rarely pay very much attention to them.


Collaborator published paper on ArXiv without my name In the last four months, I have been working on a project with a friend. After the completion of writing part of paper, I started searching for conferences and found that my friend had already submitted a previous/incomplete version of the paper on ArXiv.

Now my friend claims ownership of the idea and copyright  as it is now already  published in a pre-print. At present we both have the completed paper, codes and results. In reality, I did the most of the analysis in the project although the idea came out of discussion between us.

My friend wants to publish it on their own without giving me any credit. I even agreed  that they can be the first author, and I will be second, but they keep on insisting that they will not include me.

Even if I submit this in a conference, I am concerned that my submission will be rejected as the other author already has a proof of that work. I also hold the proof that I did the writing and computation part because most of the time I emailed them these results, but due to his cheating, I have no way to prove that I did the major work in this project. Any suggestions will be very helpful on how to tackle this problem.

Does a pre-print of the paper (containing the idea and some incomplete results) in their name, gives them an advantage if we both try to publish it?

[…] he claims that the idea belongs to him and he also has copyright for it as he already has published a pre-print for it.

Publishing content does not give you copyright for it; creating content does¹. There are exceptions if you sign over your copyright, but that would involve an actual contract, which I assume not to be the case here.

If you wrote parts of the paper or generated figures, publishing the paper without your name and consent is a copyright infringement. Hence, if you have proof of this, you have a legal case against your “friend”.

Moreover, publishing this paper as a sole author and thus denying you authorship constitutes a severe academic misconduct, which may very well end your “friend”’s academic career if you can convincingly prove it.

  Any suggestion will be very helpful on how to tackle this problem.

Collect and secure all evidence that you contributed to the project, in particular any statement from your “friend” that implies this. Get a time stamp for the full paper as soon as possible.

Assuming that you do not want to or gave up to save your relationship, take the issue to a relevant authority, e.g., your advisor, your “friend”’s advisor, your university’s legal department, the ethics board, or similar. The best choice here depends on the detailed situation and relationships. For example, if you are both students under different supervisors who are friendly with each other, I would take it to your supervisor first.

You might also be able to take the issue to the ArXiv. I am not sure about their protocol for such cases and whether they have any, but I do not expect that they will just leave the paper as it is if you can convince them that you are a worthy co-author.

  Does a preprint of the paper (contains the idea and some results,not the complete one) in his name, gives him an advantage if we both try to publish it?

If you fail to convince others of your authorship claims, yes.

¹ In any reasonable legislation and in particular every legislation that complies with international copyright conventions.


Masters degree in business engineering or management engineering Is it possible to have a masters degree in business engineering or management engineering when you don't have a first degree? But i have more than 10 years professional experience

Usually no, mostly because the undergraduate degree is validation that you've covered some baseline subject matter.  Even in more vocation-based undergraduate schools you usually need to take courses (writing, math, humanities) that might not be directly related to the subject matter.

That said, there are schools that may be willing to trade a certain amount of professional experience for a certain amount of credit towards an undergraduate degree, or schools that might let you pursue both degrees at the same time.  You'll have to shop around.


Should I apply for a master in the US? I am a CS student in Italy, about to get my bachelor degree. In the past few months I've been looking for some masters in my field (Computer Science with orientation towards Data Science) and have found some really interesting programs in top universities (some are Ivy) in the US.
I would really like to apply. I think I have the right stuff to get in, of course I'm aware of the low acceptance rates but I'm willing to try and give my best.
The only problem is my financial situation. I'll be considered as an international students and I didn't see many available scholarships; I'll just have very few possibilities to get private loans. My parents don't want me to apply because of the fact that if anything happens (health wise, for example) and I'm not able to complete my master I will be in debt of hundreds of thousands of dollars and with no equivalently repaying job.
Given my situation, should I pursue this dream of mine or try for a less expensive university in Europe?

EDIT: The real question would be: Is it worth it to apply? Will it be worth it to be in debt of a huge amount of dollars to be in one of the best schools in the world? Considering that college applications are pretty stressful and obviously require time investment, I don't want to pursue a process like this and back down at the end (in case I get in). Is this a once in a lifetime chance or would I get a similar excellence in education in good European universities?

First of all I think you should apply and then decide, based on where you are accepted.

If you can find equal level masters in Europe (I'm sure there are) that cost less, can maybe guarantee you a scholarship, and are overall less risky from a financial perspective  you should aim to these ones. Consider especially German speaking countries, like Germany itself or part of Switzerland, that offer masters in English, in this way you'd have to learn Germany which is probably the second most important language to speak in Europe. This  could open a lot of chances in those countries after you graduate.

If for some reason you only want the USA you have to find out first if it's doable from any practical viewpoint, how much your parent disapproving is gonna affect you in every possible way (mental, economical...) and considering these factors how much you want it compared to the risks.

Answer to your edit:

There are excellence in Europe, you could talk to your professors and ask them about good places.
If you want to go outside of Italy the closest place is Switzerland, with ETH and UZH in Zurich, Lausanne polytecnique and the center for computational science at the Italian Switzerland university in Lugano being among the most famous and excellent places there. Lugano may be particularly good economically and practically since you could live in Italy (Italian cost of life) and cross the border to go to lectures. They speak Italian there so you won't learn another language, but it may be more comfortable. Going farther you can look anywhere for great universities. Take Germany, UK and Netherlands for example, they surely have great universities in your field.


What can I do with my paper that is out of a work which contains no improvement of the methodology? I've started a research, and after replicating methods of other researchers (running experiments on my data), I've realised that I cannot add anything new to the field. The work contains no improvement of the methodology, I just used the established methods to analyse my data and I ended up in having some results. Consequently, I cannot publish a paper out of it (which I am almost done writing).

Nevertheless, the obtained results are new (applied to a specific problem), so they could be of interest. Furthermore, I don't want that my time and the possibly valuable results end up in the trash bin.

What can I do with it? Is arXiv suited for this?

You say that your work on methods is uninteresting, but that you believe the results to be valuable.  That's great!  You should write a paper about the results!

Sometimes people feel like the amount of manuscript text they produce for each aspect of their work should be proportional to the time and energy put into that aspect, e.g., if you spent 3/4 of your time working on the methods, then your text should be approximately 3/4 about the methods.  That is incorrect.  The amount of space something takes up in the text should be proportional to how interesting it is to the reader.  Sometimes you have to put in a lot of work on something that is very simple to explain, and that's OK.  Focus on the bits that will be interesting to the reader, and instead tell your friends the stories of how long and hard you worked on the "uninteresting" bits to get there.


Could it be more productive to work independently after PhD? Picture the following scenario:
X finished his PhD. X is also quite rich and can support himself (as well as his research) independently.

What do you think about this:

Would X's time after the PhD be well spent if he would just work 'independently'? Would this make things more difficult for him if he ever wanted to move back to an institution?

Is it in a way, in this particular scenario, not actually a very good idea, to focus solely on research and not bother with teaching and all the administrative stuff? Wouldn't he be more productive? What would hold him back?

Note: I am assuming that X is in the Humanities, that is, he does not require a lab or anything & has access to a academic library / or has his own etc.

In academia, he might have

more exposure to interesting ideas (especially cross-field pollination),
better access to students and colleagues to exchange and refine ideas with,
as well as external pressure to be productive (which might be a good thing.)

While administrative work has never inspired me to have an interesting idea, teaching and mentoring students certainly has.

It all depends on the context he's able to set up for himself as an independent researcher. If he works better in isolation, maybe he'd be better off. If he can afford to hire other researchers and create an interesting intellectual environment, that might help.


Are Indian assistant professors eligible for tenure-track positions in the US? Suppose an assistant professor from a reputable Indian university wants to apply for tenure-track positions in the United States. Would he or she have any chance? Assume that his or her publication record is on par with faculty members at top-level US universities.

Yes with caveats -- and the caveats have nothing to do with being Indian and everything to do with being outside of the American educational system:

There are particularities of the application process that are culturally bound and that you may not be familiar with (the style of the cover letter, its importance [or not], the style of your research and teaching statements, the format of your CV, who you ask to serve as a reference).
Your references may also be unfamiliar with American letters of reference styles. I find that foreign letters tend to be much shorter and much less enthusiastic.
Search committee members may not be familiar with your universities and its rank, with the ranking of the journals you've published in, and the significance of your teaching and service. They may be concerned that you do not know how to teach to American student audiences or that you may not be able to successfully apply for grants from American grant agencies.
The provost (who oversees searches) may be unwilling to authorize the search committee to bring in an international candidate due to the cost of airfare.
The university may be concerned about whether or not you will be able to obtain a visa to work. Even if you are able to get a visa, even under the best of cases, an international candidate who accepts a job offer in March may not be able to start by August of the same year because of visa delays. This may have programmatic repercussions (i.e., they need someone to teach CS101 in the Fall).
Rarely, some jobs are closed to non-Americans because the government grants or cooperating agencies require security clearances or have other restrictions. This is more common in the engineering and physical sciences.
In Canada, some positions are required to be offered to Canadian citizens before they are permitted to open to non-Canadians. The same rule technically applies in the USA for immigrant visas, but is not scrutinized as much.

etc.

As you can see, none of these have anything to do with you coming from India, and everything to do with being an international candidate. You'd have much more luck if you were applying from inside the USA (e.g., take a post-doc in the USA for a year or two and apply while on that).


What care do reviewers take when writing a review for a published paper in mathematics? Question is as in the title:

  What care do reviewers take when writing a review for a published paper in mathematics?

I have seen some reviews from MathSciNet. These reviews slightly overlap with the abstract of an article but say much more than an abstract of a paper, in a clearer way.

I am not asking for a referee report of a submitted paper. I am asking for a review of an already published
paper.

MathSciNet reviews are not the kind of reviews an editor would get for a submitted paper. Rather, what is posted on MathSciNet is more of a summary of the article and someone putting it into the context of the broader field -- something that would help a reader understand not only what the paper provides, but why it is relevant. As such, the authors of these reviewers don't have to go through all proofs with care -- they don't even have to understand the proofs as long as they understand the theorems.

On the other hand, reviewers of math papers often go to great lengths to ascertain that the proofs in the paper in question are in fact correct. That typically requires a great deal of care, detailed insight, and work.


Project design and scope: "interesting" vs "incremental" science I very recently came across a blog entry which was about a PhD candidate quitting a few weeks/months shy of completing the degree due to frustration with the way academia works in general.

Now you may agree or disagree with the notions put forth, but both the anonymous letter and the long row of comments it has attracted certainly provides an interesting and lively discussion, relevant to many academics if not all.

One particular subject it got me thinking about is the choice of projects, safe-and-uninteresting vs daring-and-interesting. For those who do not feel like reading the discussion in the blog, essentially it's about how many researchers go for projects that have little to no impact practically, in fields where a lot of the "interesting" work is put forth. Such projects are essentially after small incremental additions to the literature, more often than not special case scenarios, or replication of previously demonstrated results with other methods than previously reported.

I am currently at a large conference, and I started reflecting on this subject. I noticed how the "better" speakers claim of excellence, or ground-breaking research, the-whole-picture type projects (e.g. "mapping out the entire human kinome", or "developing antibodies for each and every human protein"). Currently I am sitting with my iPad observing people passing by my poster from some distance. Just like I suspected most people just pass by and barely even stop to read more than a sentence. That's how poster-sessions work you might say, but I am confident that a major contributor to this is the fact that the project I am presenting is inherently not that interesting; it's about a rare disease, effecting mostly elder patients, and does not involve the newest and hottest instrument or technique. I can only imagine that editors and reviewers will be equally unimpressed with the manuscript when we submit this study.

That being the case I got into thinking whether or not it's actually worth getting into such a study. I feel like I have put a lot of time and energy into something that's not really my field of study and not liekly to have a rich "return-of-investment". Before I go to my supervisor and have a serious chat about this I would like to get some feedback on whether or not this is a common phenomennon, within the biomedical sciences/academia in general. As scientists-to-be is our primary responsibility to ourselves, to our bosses/departments, or to science itself?

You have different but overlapping responsibilities to all three; you can't say that one "overrides" the others.

You have the responsibility to do "good science." By "good," I do not mean "high-impact" or "prize-winning" or anything like that; I mean "ethical": you carry out your experiments or calculations without trying to achieve a desired outcome to support a preconceived model or explanation.

You owe your advisor and yourself the same level of professional conduct: do the science properly, and let the results be what they are. You also have the responsibility to respect and properly use the resources your advisor provides: money, facilities, and time.

Finally, you have a responsibility to yourself: do work that you feel satisfies you, and that keeps you motivated. Don't do research in an area just because that's what's "hot" right now; fads come and go, but good research survives that. Second-rate research likely won't survive.


Who should I specify as my affiliation if re-writing an undergraduate paper? Years ago, I, as well as a team of other engineering students, conducted some pretty solid research for an undergrad project. We didn't end up commercializing it or anything, but I believe it would be a great fit for an upcoming conference.

I am no longer affiliated with the university where the research was originally conducted. The original paper was horrible, and needs to be re-written (I've been published before and am familiar with writing styles and the process of submitting a paper, despite not having an adviser).

Can (or should/must) I use the university as my (and my team's) affiliation? What does this actually mean? Does the university have to know I'm publishing a paper with their name on it? If so, who typically signs off on this?

I've tried to find an answer online and have come across this answer, but I'm not sure if it applies since I am not currently enrolled as a student, and because the paper is being re-written.

Your affiliation is listed so that you can be identified/contacted. Thus, your affiliation should be listed as your current employer.

Given that your university provided resources to conduct the research, you should list them in the acknowledgements section.

You should probably invite whoever supervised your project to co-author the paper. You should also invite your fellow team members to co-author the paper too.


Is it legal for a US professor to require remuneration from the foreigner for consulting services? A person with allegedly academic affiliation from some foreign country approaches me with the request to help them in research being within my expertise.

The request anticipates about 10 hours of extra work without utilizing university equipment. The service can be referred to as consulting service.

Is it legal to require a personal monetary remuneration in this case from a foreign student/postdoc being consulted?

Alternatively, I can request being a coauthor in the future publication but I lack good reasons to believe that that person would not "forget" about this after they got a help.

It is not illegal to do legal work for money.  It may, however, fall outside of your institution's employment policies, and you might get yourself in a bind with your employer.

Consulting arrangements are generally laid out in your university's policies, and are often fine (but ask at your site!).  That said, I'll delve a little deeper into your question.  It is unusual for a "student or postdoc" to request the professional consulting services of faculty members, and thus you must consider what you are being asked to do.  If you are being asked to help the student cheat -- i.e., the student is planning on representing your work as something otherwise, you should take absolutely no part in it.  If it's something central to the students project, and you are being brought in as a contractor and not a collaborator, you might consider avoiding it.

The fact that the party is foreign is not germane.


Rehearse or memorise to improve my presentations? This may be a dumb question. I would like to improve my presentation skills.

So should I rehearse my presentation at least 5-10-20 times? Or should I memorise my presentation and practice it enough?

When rehearsing, I make my presentation in front of a mirror and observe that I deliver the same messages in a different way in each time, while if I memorise what to say for each slide of my presentation, then I deliver the same messages in same way very confidently each time I practice in front of a mirror.

So I am getting confused which one is the better method to deliver an effective presentation?

It's not "either rehearse or memorize". Also, your sentence "In rehearse, every time I make presentations in front of mirror and observe that I am delivering same messages in a different way in each time." got me thinking that you probably rehearse inefficiently.

The purpose of rehearsal is to improve your presentation. So after every rehearsal you should reflect about your performance, think about points that did not come across right, and about ways to improve the presentation. If you just start over again without reflection and without a new, improved plan, you do a weird mix of "not really rehearsing" and "not really memorizing".

I'd say, a good rehearsal includes quite some memorization for the crucial parts. However, if you rehearse long enough, you may get to some point where do not even memorize your lines, but where the presentation has a natural flow such that your previously memorized phrases come out naturally.

I'd say, bare memorization is ok, but may be dangerous if you don't know the story line of your presentation as a whole. Imagine that you loose you lines and get stuck in the middle of the presentation. So also rehearse to speak freely but memorize some lines that you find particularly good at crucial points. A good structure of the presentation and a good story is very helpful here (and for a badly structured presentation, neither memorizing nor rehearsal will lead to a good presentation, anyway).


Taking vacations days in the middle of a semester Context: I am an assistant professor at a small institution in the US.

Question: My significant other has the opportunity through work to travel to an exotic location over a long weekend in February, and I would very much like to join.  That said, it would require that I miss both my Thursday and Friday classes before the weekend.  Would it be unreasonable and/or unprofessional for me to join her on this trip?

I can easily structure my content schedule in such a way that I could cancel these classes without losing anything significant, but I'm concerned about how such an absence would be perceived by my colleagues.  I have an excellent relationship with those in my department, my department chair, and my dean.

I would also be curious to hear how dependent the answer is upon my tenure status.  I am tenure-track and plan to apply for tenure three years from now.

In the departments I have worked in, it would probably be considered unprofessional to leave on a pleasure-cruise in the middle of the semester. I suspect that that is universal.

In other words, this is not the image you want to project as someone who will still have to go through the tenure process. On the other hand, it's a fairly small thing -- people are gone all the time, although almost always for professional reasons: at conferences, workshops, for collaborations. So the mechanics of being gone are all appreciated in any department, such as moving classes around, giving out reading assignments instead of in-person classes, or putting a midterm exam on such a date and having someone else proctor the exam. Students also understand these things. In the end, it will be a judgment call: It comes over as "frivolous" to leave for a vacation and cancel classes over it, but it's also not a huge deal and I'd be surprised if anyone would think that you'll lose tenure over it. It's just a bad mark in your peers' perception of your professionalism.


Is there a journal that publishes slides together with the text? I mainly refer to applied mathematics when describing my experience

Often I find that it is easier to grasp a concept from the author's slides than from the description in a paper. When one has to summarize their findings for a talk, they often end up with an exposition that gives a clearer understanding of the "big picture" and the nontrivial details. It is easier to separate what is important and what is not. If someone really needs more detail and rigour, they can check the paper, but I think that 90% of the readership would get more from the slides than from the paper.

Of course a real paper is still necessary, to provide details to the interested reader and to testify that the details work indeed (and the referees can certify it).

However, slides are typically difficult to find. Some scientists self-archive (a subset of) their slides on their personal web pages; some others are hidden in conference sites. No database such as Scopus indexes them. It is often tricky to match up a paper and its slides.

So, my question is the following.

Is there any journal that publishes slides together with their papers? Or slides only? Or, more generally, that tries to experiment and consider similar less formal media for presenting real science?

I don't know of any such journal.  The closest I've come to this is that often after I've listened to a talk, I've asked the speaker for his slides.  I can't recall ever being turned down.  Alternatively, if you can't attend a talk, you might still ask the speaker for his/her slides.  This request will likely be a bit more successful in person, but even via email it can't hurt to try.