What to do during Math PhD to have options in industry? I have recently been accepted to a top five math PhD program. The department seems to have a good mix of pure and applied math, and there are plenty of opportunities for collaboration with other departments (Stats, CS, Econ, etc.)

I am most interested in pursuing math more on the applied side of things. Moreover, I would like options outside of academia once I graduate. Looking at the previous PhD alumni, this does not seem to be a problem - anyone not in academics is doing pretty interesting stuff in finance, data science, consulting, machine learning. However, I want to make sure I am not missing something along the way that these students did which enabled them to have broad and attractive job prospects.

I am especially interested in Analysis, Probability, Stats, Machine Learning, Econ, Mathematical Biology, Cryptography, and Applied topology. I would be happy to do work involving any one of these.

My questions are these:

What should I do during my PhD to be able to have good non-academic job prospects after graduating? (Would something like a PhD minor be helpful?)
How does it differ by field? If I want to do something like quantitative finance, what do I need to do versus if I want to do something like data science?
How can I find out more information about question two. As things change and evolve, how can I find out what it is I need in order to be accepted for positions and jobs involving areas that interest me?

I am not sure if I am exactly asking the right question, so if someone else has suggestions of what I should be asking, please suggest.

Note: There are a number of questions on this site that ask similar questions, ("I'm doing math but I want to go into industry") However I think my question is rather different. Firstly, I am hoping to pursue research with applications during my PhD, rather than focusing on super pure math. Secondly, I am asking this question before I have even started my PhD, hoping to know what I should do before, during, and after my program. Most of the other questions basically have the theme "I did a PhD in pure math, now what?"

Based on my own interactions with graduate students and post-docs, I would suggest:

Develop skills that are useful to potential employers.  This includes basic communication skills and a broad background in data analysis and modeling as well as buzz-word computer skills (R, Python, Deep Learning, etc.)
Develop cultural-competence for the corporate world.  Learn how to dress and act the part, preferably by immersing yourself in the corporate world through an internship.
Have some examples of your work (besides your papers and dissertation) to show to potential employers.


Life after graduation; should I update my academic reference on my career progression? In my undergraduate years, I have forged a rather close relationship with some of my professors including the head of school – they were supportive as I did struggled with mental-health issues and were also open to interesting academic discussion as equals.

Before I returned to my home country, they have offered to be my reference for both academic and industry prospects – including for reasons related to graduate admissions.
After seven weeks of searching, I have now found a research role in the area of air-traffic modelling for UAVs at a new research institute within a globally ranked top-fifteen university while working alongside with another professor at another university.

While I am unsure whether they were rang up, I would, however, like to continue keeping in touch with them as I do visit the country of my alma mater every few weeks while also being aware of my plans to pursue postgraduate studies at my alma mater.
Do professors empirically appreciate their former students keeping them in the loop of their career progress? Or would I only come across as being “just another student” unless I have produced stellar research work?

Do professors empirically appreciate their former students keeping them in the loop of their career progress?

You know your professor's personalities better than anyone here on SE. If they seemed cold and remote to you while you worked with them, then you probably won't gain much by keeping in touch. But it seems you have 'a rather a close relationship' with them. If that is the case, then I would say: Yes, get in contact with them.

Understand, you aren't just 'keeping in touch'. What you are actually doing is professional networking. If these professors work in your field, or have any similarities, then it is to your advantage to stay in touch with people in your field. At some point, you may find that they can help you with future employment. Or perhaps as your own career advances, they will come to you for help in something. This is part of the 'game' of being successful in the professional world.

Tip: If you haven't seen these professors in a while, ask if you can stop by. Just try to have lunch together. Tell them about your new role. If you learn that someone did help you by being a reference, see to it to send that person a Thank You card. It's all part of the networking game.

Lastly, Now you haven't tagged what country your are in. If it is the case that in your particular country, in your particular culture/society, people don't network like this, then ignore my answer.


Is it self-plagiarism to reuse sources? I've taken two classes in a row that require research papers to be written as an assignment, and since the second one has had a similar criteria for which topics are allowed, I decided to continue researching the same topic. However, after checking with the school's plagiarism checker, it flagged me for roughly half of my 2nd paper's sources being reused. Is this something I should be concerned about? The rest of the paper is completely original and not copy-pasted from my first one at all, plus all of my sources are cited correctly.

In general, no (and how did you get access to your school's plagiarism checker)

If the papers are related they should share sources.  From a published peer-reviewed standpoint, I'd bet several papers reuse half their sources.

This sounds like a paper for a grade though.  In which case you actually have a 3rd option.  Talk to the professor or TA.  Bring the first paper and this paper with you and let them make a decision.  Assuming you didn't plagiarize, they'll see the content is different.

Remember, part of taking a university course is to learn how to write papers with novel ideas.  The professor and TAs are there to help you learn how to present your ideas without plagiarizing sources.  Especially coming before the paper is due shows a good-faith effort.


Does publishing a book while employed by an academic institution grant them legal claim on the royalties? If I publish a book on my research topics while employed for an academic institution, can they claim part of the revenues I get from royalties ? My question is relative to Europe, but if someone knows also for other countries, I will welcome additional answers.

In general, no. (This is based on my experience in the US.) One's employing institution does not have any claim on royalties from books written while a student or faculty member. However, it's possible that there might be exceptions: for example, sometimes a university may help financially in the publication of a book, and this might be reflected in the publication contract. Of course, in such circumstances the book is not expected to make any money, which is why the university is helping out in the first place.

A related and very common phenomenon is for the publisher to hold the copyright on an academic title. My own book is like this. I am entitled to royalties, but the press holds the copyright for some defined period. Again, this is due to the terrible economics of publishing academic monographs.

There have been cases where universities have tried to assert very broad rights over the intellectual property of their faculty employees (e.g., lecture notes as well as books, etc), but I think these have generally failed. It does still happen: here's an example where the University of Louisiana is trying to broadly claim rights to scholarly output, including royalties from books. These sweeping assertions of rights have sometimes been motivated by the desire of administrators to claim a share of some of the genuinely lucrative things now produced by some university researchers, such as patentable biotechnologies, with books caught up in the net but not really directly targeted. Patents are an area with real money at stake, where the university's investment (in laboratory space and so on) is much higher, and where university claims on income from work done while employed are strongly and successfully asserted. Books, not so much.


How many reference letters are too many? A friend is applying for a junior faculty position which asks for "at least 3 reference letters from professors". He was lucky enough to have worked with big names in our field, so he was thinking of getting 5 reference letters. Is it too much?

Keep in mind that these are well known professors in top/good universities, not friends and family type of references.

"Too many letters of recommendation" is not something I would consider a problem.

At some point additional letters may become overkill and not really help you that much.  But I can't imagine them detracting from your application, provided that they are all good recommendations from high-profile people.

I would certainly not leave out a recommendation from a "big name" in your field because of volume.  The fact that you have worked with a large number of high profile people, and they think highly of you, is a good thing.  And you never know which of those people someone who is potentially hiring you might know or think highly of.

Five is certainly not too much if they want "at least 3".

The wording clearly means that more than three letters is acceptable. In fact, one might conclude that three letters is the bare minimum and a "good" application should have more.

I would normally consider five letters to be a lot (though not harmful, as discussed above).  But it doesn't seem like an unusually high number if they want a minimum of three.


Has anyone failed coursework requirement and got terminated from PhD program? I'm doing a PhD in Economics, a 3-year program. I am required to do 4 coursework and receive a grade of B+. The thing is I didn't meet the grade requirement of all four courses, although I didn't fail the courses. I have a very good research proposal (in my opinion). I've got all the data on hand. I have discussed about this with my supervisor and he said I might get terminated; it depends on the research committee after I defend my proposal. I think it would be very unfair if I've got a justifiable proposal but still got terminated because I didn't meet the coursework requirement. The university regulation does not say clearly what would happen if someone fails the coursework requirement.

So, I was wondering if there is anyone out there who is/was in my position. Did you get terminated from the school?

Yes, it happens. And it has to be this way.

We've had students who do not do sufficiently well in the coursework, but do so well in other regards that they are allowed to continue on to their Phd: the research committee is there to weigh up the positive and negative signs, within the regulations set out for them. Occasionally, we have students who pass the coursework and then struggle with self-guided research. So now we have two gateways: the coursework, and then a year later an upgrade report and seminar, which is their formal transition from an MPhil programme to a DPhil programme.

A department may not get many opportunities to formally remove a failing student. This will vary by institution and discipline, but it can be the case that there are not many opportunities within the trajectory of a single PhD to terminate cleanly and indisputably.

We never like to do it. It's the worst thing we can do. Apart from the alternative, when the alternative is letting a candidate go forwards into a drawn-out and ultimately unsuccessful attempt at completing the PhD. This is exacerbated if they might make increasing demands on staff, and/or might become increasingly disruptive to other students.

If the supply of good potential candidates is greater than the number of available places; or there are financial penalties when students fail later rather than earlier in the process; then the imperative to filter out weak candidates becomes stronger.

Coursework, research proposals, upgrade seminars and upgrade reports, are some of the small selection of tools we have to help us identify weak candidates. Writing a PhD thesis is indeed completely different to doing coursework. And there are candidates that excel at coursework, but could not write a doctoral thesis; and maybe there are candidates where the reverse is true. Nevertheless, the coursework gives us an opportunity to assess a candidate's skills and domain knowledge.

So that's why a justifiable proposal is not in and of itself sufficient (even when it's a self-funded candidate). If successful coursework is specified as a requirement, then the regulation doesn't need to say what happens if a student fails the coursework: if any requirement isn't met, then the candidacy doesn't have a right to proceed - that's the essence of a requirement. There might be alternatives to some requirements: these should be in the regulations somewhere. Your supervisors, or the faculty's graduate tutor, or the university's graduate school, should be able to advise.


when and how can I write a thank you letter for my professor? I took a course with my supervisor this semester. the class is finished.
I really enjoyed every moment in class. I could ask all of my questions very easily and he always was available to answer them. it was an interactive class.
The final exam is not taken yet.
I wanted to write a thank you letter to my professor and thanking him for the course.
I was wondering if you could tell me when is the appropriate time to send him an email. and what should I say to him in my email?

The text you are writing here is perfect! It is personal, highlights the relevant aspects, and it is not overly enthusiastic.

I personally would send it after the exam was taken and graded.


Should I notify the teacher that he accidentally gave out the answers to an assignment? For one of my class projects, the teacher coded the entire solution, then took out a few sections that we are supposed to complete for our assignment. This incomplete code was distributed to the class as a starting point. When he was writing the solution, he used source control. He forgot to delete his repository, so all of his commits are there... You can checkout the commits to get the full solution. I don't think he is aware of it, because he hasn't brought it up in class.

I found this while I was working on my solution. Once I found it, it was difficult to find a different path to the solution. I think my solution is dissimilar, but I feel I am playing a dangerous game here.

I'm not sure what I should do here. I could choose to not tell him and hope they don't catch it, or I could choose to tell him and basically admit I had access to the solution while I was working on it.

Send him a polite email explaining that, while you completed the assignment on your own (which I am assuming to be true), by stumbling upon the solutions in advance you had a hard time doing anything different. Professors are people--he should recognize his mistake and appreciate that you were forthcoming. Chances are he'll reassign the project or discount its weight toward your grade and just tell people to review it anyway because you need to know the material. The sooner you say something the better though. Indeed, after a while it may look like you were trying to hide it from him.


Is it wise to do teaching-assistantship in a university I am not studying in? The universities from which I earned my BSc. and MSc. degrees are not the same. Last week, a professor who knows me from my BSc. university called me and asked me to accept his teaching assistantship for one of his MSc. courses.

Despite probably receiving a letter of recommendation from him for my PhD applications;

What would be benefits of accepting such proposal?
Is it wise to do teaching-assistant in a university I am not studying in?

Benefits:

You keep your contacts with the academic environment, that may be useful applying for a PhD.
Some professors will know you, and this that may help you get a position (depending on how it is done in your country).
You gain teaching experience.

Drawbacks:

TA salaries are usually quite low. Depending on your background, you may be loosing money. The working conditions may also not be so good.
You are not getting other kind of experience, that would be useful for any non-teaching job.

On a side note, it may look weird on your CV being a TA while not enrolled. This is not necessarily bad, but be prepared to be questioned about it in interviews.


Reusing reference letters I am a first-year PhD student applying for STEM fellowships this fall (NSF GRFP, NDSEG, Hertz), which I applied for last fall as a senior undergraduate. Although I was not awarded any of them, the reviews from the NSF GRFP included a brief statement that my "letters are good". Hence, I am planning to ask one of my previous writers (a supervisor from a research-oriented internship) if he would be willing to provide a reference again.
Since he has communicated in the past that time can be tight for him (as I also observed when working with him), I was planning to tell him that he could reuse his previous letters (or make minimal modifications), since I believe that the letters were strong (he also wrote one for graduate admissions which resulted very favorably), and then hopefully it would not be too much of a burden to submit them.
I have considered the idea that his message about time could be his way of implying that he would not like to write another letter, as one of my requests for a letter around that time received no response, but given that we've communicated very positively since then and that the working relationship during the internship was very positive, I am hoping that is not the case. I figure that if he is not interested in providing a reference this time he will let me know or simply not reply, but in the case that it really is just an issue of time, then knowing it would be less effort than before could be a deciding factor in his willingness. I also considered asking other writers instead, but I do believe that his reference would be one of the strongest if he is willing to submit it, so I figured I should at least ask.
In light of this, my question is: Is there any reason to believe that reusing a reference letter for doctoral STEM fellowships (NSF GRFP, NDSEG, Hertz) would weaken the strength of the application?

Reusing a reference letter is not itself a problem, but good reference letters are tailored for the target goal.
A letter writer is likely to reuse substantial portions of a letter for the same candidate without you asking.
I think the warning about time is more likely to be encouraging you to give a substantial time cushion or alternatively to make sure you have a backup if he has to say no, not meant to dissuade you from asking again.
When you ask, remind and thank the writer for the past letters. You don't need to ask that they reuse one, they can manage that on their own.


How to restart an assignment after a long break? I usually work on an assignment in a continuous flow. I study Philosophy, so I have to read and write a little every day.

I have recently shifted place and it took a whole two weeks gap. Now that I'm back on the desk, I don't know where to start from. My already half-done assignment looks gibberish to me.

It's frustrating and very difficult for me to get past that feeling and start over again. Any helpful suggestions on what I can do about this?

Actually, if it looks like gibberish, then starting over is probably the wisest option. It will get you back in the flow. Put the first "version" aside and just begin again from the description you have of the task.

I'll note that some people doing important work re-write from scratch, maybe more than once, to get what they think is a better result each time.


What are the implications of distributing a faculty annual salary over 9 or 12 months? It has been mentioned couple of times in this site that faculty could be able to distribute their salary over 9 or 12 months. What are advantages and disadvantages of each? And can faculty who distribute their salary over 12 months work during the summer? Do they get 1 month vacation and sick leave? Any effect on taxes, health insurance, and deduction for benefits? Does it affect the amount of summer salary from the university or a funding agency?

There may be some confusion here about the difference between 9 and 12 month appointments vs. arranging to have the salary for a 9 month appointment paid out over 12 months.

In the U.S., the typical faculty appointment is a 9 month appointment.  Under this arrangement, a faculty member is required to be present on campus and teaching (and doing research and service) from September through May.  They typically do not have formal vacation or sick leave but in practice can stay home (and cancel classes) if sick.  They can also go on personal travel when classes are not in session.  Faculty don't have to formally request time off as long as they attend to their responsibilities.

In this system faculty do not have to work over the summers, although many faculty do teach summer school or work on research grants and earn additional salary over the summer.  Faculty will also often work on unfunded research projects over the summer.

Many faculty with 9 month appointments choose to have their annual salary paid out over 12 months.  This doesn't create any obligation to work over the summer and has no significant tax consequences, but it is more convenient for household budgeting since summer salary can be quite variable and unpredictable from year to year.

For example, I just learned today that I will be able to earn a month of summer salary teaching a course that starts on June 8.  I'm still waiting to hear if some research funding for this summer will come through.  I've designed my personal budget so that I'm not dependent on summer salary, so I have my 9 month salary paid out over 12 months.

12 month appointments are quite common for academic administrators and some full time researchers.  These typically do accrue sick leave and paid vacation, which has some advantages but also has some disadvantages such as having to explicitly request time off.


File naming conventions when sending file back and forth via email? I often edit a manuscript draft with co-authors by sending drafts of a document back and forth via email. Depending on who I am working with, cloud-based solutions to working collaboratively are not always an option.

After some back and forth a lot of interim drafts begin floating around, so a lot of my co-authors either initial, date, or number a working document when we send it back and forth for edits. Some do none of this at all. I am wondering if there is a correct way to "name" a document when collaborating via email. Is there a consensus on best practices for file-naming conventions when collaboratively editing via email?

Not using version control is bad.

  Depending on who I am working with, cloud-based[, version controlled] solutions to working collaboratively are not always an option.

You can use cloud-based solutions even when some collaborators are against them. All you need to do is: Download and email the cloud version to collaborators that refuse to use the cloud, and upload whatever they send back.


Summer Research with Advisor or at National Lab? I have the option of doing research with my advisor this summer (yay, funding!) or working with a collaborator at a highly-regarded national lab (a research position, but called an internship). I have worked at this lab two summers ago, and it was very enjoyable, fairly productive, and I networked with people with whom I would love to work with in the future. I realized that this kind of work in this environment would be my dream job. To work there, however, I almost need a PhD (it's possible with a MS, but a PhD is obviously more competitive). Working at the lab has built friendships and has provided several networking opportunities since.

Unfortunately, the summer research at the lab doesn't further my dissertation. Working with my advisor does.

Should I go for the position at the lab for the summer, or should I stay and do research? If I wanted to work with the internship, how would I breach the topic with my advisor?

One unfortunate by-product of the increasingly specialized nature of doctoral research is the tendency to put on "blinders" when it comes time to work on the dissertation: PhD students tend to forget that there are things to study and learn about outside the field of the dissertation. (For example, I always have a few students who complain in the course evaluation "I'm studying X; I shouldn't have to take this mandatory course!")

However, in spite of this, research is becoming inherently more interdisciplinary and interconnected. So having additional experience—and additional contacts—outside your main field can only help you in the long run, if you're planning to pursue a "knowledge-based" career.

That said, this is definitely a matter you should bring up with your advisor. This early in your career, it's probably not such a big deal to do something else for the summer. But you should still check if there are some important counterarguments (related to funding or project sponsorship).


Does the admission committee for graduate studies look down on foundation courses Many universities do not accept international secondary school qualifications unless there is an agreement between countries. The agreement I think compares the standard used in the country of the university (e.g. GCSE A-levels or SQA (Advanced) Highers in the UK) with the qualifications of another country.

International Students with unaccepted qualifications are given a conditional offer in some UK universities. The student has to do a "Foundation Course in ......" in an institution affiliated with the university (an "International College") and by passing with a certain grade, they go to 2nd year of a 4 year bachelor's degree or to 1st year of a 3 year bachelor's.

Beside the topics related to the degree, the foundation course focuses a lot on academic skills such as writing, presenting, note taking etc..
On the university transcript, the first year appears as a "credit transfer".

My question (finally), does the admission committee look down on such certificates even if the student got the bachelor's degree with a high GPA?

If it makes a difference, I would appreciate it if answers are given related to: 1- entry to MS degree 2- direct entry to PhD.

In general, if the GPA is high, this shouldn't be too much of a big deal. Normally I would look upon such a class as equivalent to an introductory-level course, and would not "look down" upon such a course. If the grade in such a course is poor, however, that could affect the decision.

If you are concerned about reviewers at another school evaluating this course appropriately, you could always include a note about it somewhere as part of your application (either master's or PhD).


Reply to a professor's response to my email or not? So I sent a thank you email to a professor who wrote me a reference letter. I updated her on the results of my applications. She replied back in a really nice email congratulating me and giving me some suggestions for my future career. I feel kind of rude ending our conversation this way, but at the same time, I also think it might be annoying for her to see another thank you email from me. If I do reply, I will most likely just say thank you again, this time for your kind words, and so on, which sound a bit repetitive. What would be an appropriate thing to do in this situation?

As an instructor, when I write a nice personal note to a student, it means I spent some time thinking about them and how I could help them.  I appreciate when someone says thank you.  Here's how to do it without inviting another round.

  Thank you.  I really appreciate your help and advice.

  Turtle


How badly does failing a core class and retaking it hurt your chances at grad school programs? I'm sorry if this is in the wrong place.
I'm an undergraduate majoring in biology. I think, this semester, I'll fail a class on Statistics (the class is titled "Statistics for Life Sciences"). While I have the option this semester to use "Satisfactory/Unsatisfactory" and protect my GPA, this is nonetheless a failure that will show up on my transcript.
I know I messed up and I feel really bad... I could have taken an introductory Math class (an option available to those with only an AS Level in Mathematics) before taking this Statistics class and I stupidly chose not to (officially, an AS Level meets the prerequisite for this Statistics class, though most students taking it have a full A Level in Mathematics). But this is no excuse (it's officially allowed, and plenty of AS Math students succeed in this class) and I think in fact reflects worse on my judgement.  :(
I fully intend to retake this course (I can't not take it anyway; it's a core class, plus Statistics is important in Biology) and do much better in it.
How badly does this hurt my chances at a graduate school program in biology? Assuming my other biology-related classes are okay (A grades). I don't know how I'm going to explain it. I was hoping to take a research Master's, then a PhD. Am I screwed?
Thanks for any input and and have a nice day.

At any stage in your career, people who will evaluate whether to give you an opportunity will (or at least should) be looking at multiple aspects of your CV. For each "weak" aspect there should be a "strong" aspect that offsets it. Provided this is true, you should become eligible for consideration. After that, it is often a matter of luck and the competitive nature of the opportunity.
Having said, that, there are places and systems which I personally know of that will automatically reject applications that have a single blemish. These places and systems are making a mistake (in my opinion). In any case, perhaps you would not want to be in a place that does not believe in giving people a second chance.
In summary, I think there are a number of good places which would give you the opportunity if you can counter this particular failure by something---which could even be a good grade in the same course on your second attempt.


Writing a paper on user interface without empirical evaluation I am writing a paper proposing an improvement in the design of a specific user interface. However, this improvement is only based on axiomatic and theoretical assumptions and I haven't made an empirical evaluation yet. The problem, however, is that I write the paper alone and not for any university or company. And I cannot implement any empirical evaluation due to lack of funding.

My question is now: does it make make sense to write such a paper without evaluation? Is something like this even published by journals? In my paper it would of course become clear that all is only a theoretical and that it would have to be examined empirically in future work.

I'm afraid that a "user interface" without users is an oxymoron. Users don't conform to axioms and certainly not to theoretical assumptions.

While you may have made an important contribution, without testing on someone other than yourself you have no basis for validity.

Even quite popular websites, which use sophisticated design elements, require tweaking as the designers learn about users. I'm afraid you will need to find some way to do at least a modest test. They may even call your "axioms" and "assumptions" into question. Who can know, until you look?

But let me add a more positive suggestion. It might be possible to get a test done at no cost to you. Some universities (I'll single out University of Maryland, but they aren't alone) have CS programs strongly focused on UI. It isn't impossible that you propose to some faculty member that he/she take your design on as a student project in which they would do the implementation and analysis and give you feedback on it. You would also get theoretical feedback, of course. I can't guarantee that anyone would be interested in this, but it might be possible if you make the attempt. I suspect it would be possible as an undergraduate project, but have no way to actually predict.


Will an off-topic Masters hurt my chances of a PhD place? I have just completed the third year of an integrated master's degree (a three-year undergraduate degree plus an additional year of study at a master's degree level, with the final degree being an MPhys) in Astrophysics at a UK university. This summer I have to decide the topic of my final year dissertation, which counts for 50% of my final year.

I am almost certain I would like to continue in research and hence I am also starting to look for PhD places. I am very interested in cosmology, but with no idea of a specific area I want to go into and so I had thought of doing something in the field for my Master's dissertation, to get an idea of what it would be like to perform cosmology research.

However, the university I am at does not have a research group in this area and no facilities or expertise either. I have approached a potential supervisor (the lecturer who taught my one cosmology module, who is a plasma physicist), but he has told me that it is entirely up to me to decide on a topic/ question, which I am wary of doing due to my complete inexperience and lack of knowledge.

So, my question is this: if I decide to do my Master's dissertation on a different topic (eg solar physics), will I be at a disadvantage when applying for cosmology PhDs?

Don't ask us.

Contact your favourite three prospective universities for your cosmology PhD. Better still, contact your favourite three supervisors for your cosmology PhD. Ask them:

What Master's dissertation topic will prepare me best for my intended cosmology studies?
What Master's dissertation topic will make me most likely to be successful when applying to study a cosmology PhD?

(The first question is much more interesting than the second).

You will find enthusiasm for engaging with your question and your situation, because you are expressing specific interest in their field and because you are not asking them to decide anything about your application – since you have not applied. Quite a lot of people in senior levels in cosmology are interested in cosmology and are glad to find interest in cosmology in other people.


My work was published and my name was nowhere to be found: how should I handle this? I worked as a contract researcher with a university-affiliated institute.  I ended up doing qualitative analysis and extensive writing for an academic paper. My former supervisor has basically edited and published my work under his name.  The papers are different but only in the way that an interim and final draft are different - the structure is the same and some sentences were either paraphrased or identical.

The analysis and final recommendations are also identical, he did not supplement my analysis with his own. Although, the analysis process was a collaborative process, I was the one who did the VAST majority of the writing with him chiming in occasionally about what he did/did not like. The basic distribution of labour was: he conceived of the project, did the interviews, made comments on drafts, performed the final edit and responded to peer review questions. I performed the analysis, performed the literature review and wrote the bulk of the paper.

To boot, I feel like this was a punitive action because at various points after the end of my contract he tried to get me to do various forms of free labour for him which I did not do because it was a substantial amount of work and I was busy working another job. Also, I feel that I should be reimbursed for my time because, quite frankly, I need to pay my rent.    I feel that by not including my name on this paper, I am being punished for not being at his beck and call.

I feel that this is extremely unethical, verging on just plain wrong. I am wondering what I can do as this is a research institute setting (not a formal university setting but affiliated) and I was on contract.

What options do I have?

This seems to be a real case of Scientific misconduct by your former supervisor. By common scientific ethics, everybody who made significant scientific contributions to a publication must be named as an author.

In practice, violations of this rule occur, and there are several options for you to react to it. In fact, several institutions have a responsibility to follow up on indications of scientific misconduct, any of which you could try to approach on this matter.

The research institution itself is responsible for investigating any possible scientific misconduct of their members. The question is of course which organizational level to approach first. The level just above your former supervisor may have conflicts of interest, but any higher levels may suggest that it should be dealt with on lower levels first. This is probably best judged from the local situation.
Journals and conferences must make sure that scientific results they publish were obtained in adherence to standard scientific rules. Editors of the journal have the responsibility to investigate problematic cases, and may take measures such as correcting the author list or retracting the paper. If you want to take this approach, it would be best to contact the editor in chief of the journal (if it is a journal publication).
National science foundations usually have their own rules concerning scientific misconduct, and investigate cases where violations may have occured. This applies especially if the research was (co-)funded by such an organisation (check the acknowledgments of the paper in question, or it may have directly been your former source of funding), but some foundations also take this role more generally and may feel responsible if the scientist in question gets any money from them. An easy approach will be if the foundation in your country has a contact point for scientific misconduct. Otherwise you could ask the central administration there how best to proceed.

In any case, secure your documents. Drafts or analysis results that you sent to your former supervisor will probably be a very important proof of your claims.

Also, before you take any of these quite serious steps, it could be helpful to confront your former supervisor with the issue. You can clearly state that you see it as a case of scientific misconduct, and that you are willing to pursue the case with any accountable institutions such as the ones I listed above.


Publication fee paid, but no response from editor I submitted a paper to a journal, which was accepted for publishing. I made the payment and signed the copyright form. I enquired the state of the transaction of the bank and the amount was credited to the journal’s account. After that, I got no response from their side.

What should I do?

Before jumping to conclusions, the first thing to do is to send a polite email to the editor for an acknowledgement or current status of transaction. Short delays are manageable, but how long or short differs from one journal to another.

There are several factors that you might have to think through to determine your next action.

Whether you have submitted your manuscript to a hijacked/predatory journal; these journals might pretend to be a reputable journal by sounding the same but differing in spelling to mislead you.
Whether the journal is reputable; one of the ways to rule this out would be to check the volume and issue number. This would give an idea of how long was this journal was publishing.
Whether this level of delay is usual; sometimes even if the money is credited on the other end, it may take some time reach the necessary department.

Resorting to legal action would be the last thing to do.


New to USA - Masters vs. Staying with my mentor I'm 23, I recently immigrated to USA (legally lol) and I'm loving the amount of opportunity here and I sure want to make good use of it. However, I'm confused about a major decision and need your opinions.

I graduated from India with a Bachelors in Engineering degree (Computer Science) from an okay-ish standard University. Lots of people I run into tell me that I should get into a Master's program, as it will not only give me a great education and name of a USA school on my resume but also teach me a lot about culture and life in general.

But on the other hand, I have my uncle who is a CEO and founder of a multinational and multi-million software development company, which is where I'm working right now. Since I live with him too, we talk a lot and he is my mentor. Despite his insanely busy schedule, he is always willing to talk to me and answer my questions and teach me stuff. Its good for me since my life goal is to start a software company myself in future and learning from him can be a game changer. Its bad for me because I'm kinda immature, and staying with him keeps me on a safe side (CEO's nephew).

My question is, what would you do if you were me? Sticking with mentor vs. getting a master's degree.

Depends on what you expect to get from a master's degree.

From the sounds of it, your career path certainly isn't going to be dependent on the credentials, but could perhaps be aided by a degree.

Personally, I could see you getting benefit out of a good Masters on a couple of counts:

An introduction to where the state of the art lies. Since it sounds like you have an entrepreneurial bent, finding this state of the art could help point you in the direction of problems which have been solved, but not productized... could be a great start for a company.
Another mentor. Having multiple people to bounce ideas off of is a valuable thing, especially when they have substantially different backgrounds.
A chance to exercise your grit, away from the perhaps comfortable situation you're in now. A masters will force you outside your comfort zone.
The benefits you list are going to be there for sure; an immersion into American culture and life.

Of course, getting all of this doesn't require a Masters degree. You're already living in the USA, and you can try to stretch your research legs on your own.


Arxiv rejection of preprints Following ArXiv rules I contacted with an well-known expert in thermodynamics (he is author of a known monograph) we discussed my work during several days and finally he endorsed me. When my work was ready to appear a moderator removed it, alluding to technical problems with my submission (a embedded font problem), although more latter moderators asked me personal and even economic questions! I never answer such questions and forgot the whole issue

The paper is accessible in my page at academia.edu

I have participated in an Essay Contest with another work, and it has been selected as one of the finalists. It is cited here together other three finalist essays.

I submitted this new work to ArXiV, it has been removed and I received the next response:

  Your submission has been removed upon a notice from our moderators, who
  determined it to be inappropriate for arXiv. Please find another forum.

  For more information on our moderation policies see:

  http: //arxiv. org/help/moderation

  --
  arXiv moderation

ArXiv already archives several essays submitted to the same Essay contest, such as 1209.0023, 1209.1257, 1211.1917, 1210.3575

Therefore it is not a problem with the Contest or with the format. Notice that only one of above four has been selected as finalist.

According to the moderation policy I cannot ask to moderators about the details on their decision. The excuse is that "moderators are not referees", but this looks a bit childish, because it seems that they are accepting that moderators cannot sustain logically the decisions that they take about others' work.

Would I write to the advisory committee chair? Would I take some other action?

EDIT: Finally the first work rejected by Arxiv mods was published in the International Journal of Thermodynamics. I no longer care about ArXiv.

As said in the comments, the situation seems to be different for each of your papers. The font problem is understandable, but it's hard to see what you mean by "personal and even economic questions". However, if you didn't answer the questions, it's not surprising that your paper was not published in arXiv.

Concerning the essay, I quote from the FAQ, "arXiv accepts only submissions in the form of an article that would be refereeable by a conventional publication venue.", and in particular, " This excludes [...] papers that contain inflammatory or fictitious content, papers that use highly dramatic and mis-representative titles/abstracts/introductions". I'm in no position to scientifically judge the content of your essay, but at first glance, it seems quite provocative (assumptions that are not fundamental).

If you believe that your essay is "refereeable by a conventional publication venue", then the moderation appeal is there for this. Although the moderators do not have to motivate their decision as a reviewer would do, by bringing sufficient support that your paper meets the criteria required by arXiv (in particular by demonstrating that it doesn't fit in any of the categories listed under "inappropriate format", the fact that other essays have been published in the past is not really relevant, you would have to show the quality of your content on its own).

In general, arXiv moderators are human moderators, and it could be the case that the rejection of your paper was a mistake. However, keep in mind that publishing in arXiv is not a granted right, and that "arXiv reserves the right to reject or reclassify any submission".


Will one with record of unfinished PhD on his/her CV be doubted of his/her ability? A PhD student of my advisor (I am a master student), having been enrolled the doctorate program for less than a year, is now unsure about whether or not to finish it.

One of his concerns is that if he continues, but eventually quits the doctorate program, and applies for a normal job, the future interviewer, during interview, may suspect his lack of ability due to the record of an unfinished PhD program.

However, if he does not write on his CV about the years during PhD program, the interviewer may further question about the absent years.

So, does a record of an unfinished PhD program makes employers doubt a person's ability? Or are there other negative consequences in it (besides, of course, the opportunity cost of the time interval)?

In addition to helping me reassure him, such information also helps me to decide whether to get a PhD in the future.
(Not being anglophone, if I misused some terms in English please correct me.)

Edit: Wow, to my surprise, this is probably the most popular question among SE questions I have asked (in all sites). I appreciate every answer and have read all of them, but chose Mr Romik for being the earliest among all good answers.

does a record of an unfinished PhD program makes employers doubt a person's ability?

I very much wish it were not so, but the honest answer is yes. Employers, within the restricted context of reviewing job applications, are forced to rely on very partial and superficial information given to them in CVs and job applications. Moreover, they are given huge numbers of applications to select from under time pressure. They respond to this in a way that I think is completely rational, but nonetheless extremely frustrating (to them as well as to the candidates), which is to assign a highly inflated significance to each piece of information given to them: positive things appear much more positive than they should, and negative things appear much more negative than they should.

In particular, both an unfinished PhD and a long period of seeming inactivity in one's CV are likely to be perceived at least somewhat negatively, certainly if they are unaccompanied by an explanation, and possibly (to a smaller extent) even when an explanation is provided. It wouldn't kill someone's chances of getting a job, and can be overcome by many other positive things one has to say about themselves, but I'm pretty sure it will have at least a small negative effect.


How to write an email to an academic asking for a summer research project? Summer research projects sound like a good way to find out about a university before applying to do  PhD there. Hopefully, it would also advertise ones research abilities, making it easier to obtain a PhD position there.

I know how to obtain a summer project within my own university. One can simply go to a professors office in their office hours and making tentative enquiries. Obviously this is only possible because I am already working there.

I would like to email some professors from other institutions (in other countries) to find out if there would be a possibility of doing a summer research project with them (in their university). How should this email be phrased to maximise the chances of it getting a reply?

If it is relevant, I am a theoretical physics student, who is in the penultimate year of a degree with integrated masters.

Taking on an undergraduate for a short-term research project is, especially in theoretical and computational fields, essentially an act of service on the part of the professor.  By that I mean that usually the professor will put in much more than they get out of it.  This is because the student will usually need a significant amount of one-on-one tutoring, or at least time, to understand what needs to be done and learn the tools that will be used to do it.  That leaves little time (in a summer) for actually producing research results, and since it is likely the student's first project, progress is likely to be slow.

If the professor is at your own university and you have already established a connection and a good impression, then they may be willing to do it based on that.  The next best situation is to have a professor who knows you well recommend you to the professor at the other university.  But if you're cold contacting a professor who knows nothing about you, you need to demonstrate that

You're in a good program and have excellent grades;
you have familiarized yourself with some part of their research (as well as you can with your current level of preparation);
You have good communication skills; and
You have some tools that are useful in the indicated field (e.g. substantial programming experience, experience with particular methods or techniques).

All this needs to be in a short email (a long email probably won't get read at all).  Even the above quite often be enough.  Of course, if you are exceptional in some way then make sure to highlight that.  For instance:

You have some published research already
You won a major award (e.g. you placed in the top few worldwide in the IMO)
You did something else that shows you have aptitude for the field and includes a tangible, demonstrable result

The last one might be something like "I implemented computational method X in C and used it to solve this interesting problem; here is the code on Github and the results."


How do professors interpret normally distributed midterm or final exam scores? I had recently taken a class where things are poorly taught and much of the studying was self study. This then turned the course into a function of time and workload, and the resulting midterm mark is normally or bell shape distributed with a center of 50.

Needless to say, people who had less workload earned higher scores, people who had more workload earned less scores. After the exam, no one felt that the exam was a good reflection of individual capabilities but it is uncertain if the professor had gotten the hint.

How do professors interpret this outcome? Specifically, are there actions taken to some how adjust this (because most courses have an average passing around a C or 70 instead of 50)?

Here is how I normally assign grades in a class of 30-50 students, given a distribution of scores:

Declare the average to be either a B or B+, depending on how satisfied I am with the class's performance as a whole.
To find the A/B cutoff, look above the average for obvious clumps. If, say, the average is 75% and there are ten scores of 85% or higher, and no scores between 80 and 85, then the scores higher than 85 are the As.
There will not always be obvious clumps, and in that case I put the cutoff somewhere between the average and the maximum in a semi-arbitrary way. I may look back at some exams to see if particular students did what I consider A work.
Determine the B/C and C/D cutoffs, then pluses and minuses, using a similar process.
To distinguish Ds from Fs, I don't make a numerical cutoff. Fs are reserved for students who have not shown me that they're actually trying.

The benefit of this method is that if I accidentally make the exam too hard or too long, the students don't pay the price. But I always try to make my exams straightforward, with at most one challenging problem, because experience shows that asking students to regurgitate what I've told them already provides a good enough range of scores to separate students from each other. If I've done things right, the average is usually in the low 80s.

Now, your professor may or may not use a system like mine. He may simply enter the scores into the grade book and use rigid, pre-determined cutoffs, regardless of the class's performance. The only way to know is to ask him.

By the way, you've observed that the people who spent more time studying got higher scores, and this strikes me as completely fair. If the class could be aced without studying, it wouldn't be a very useful class.


Why is it so hard to convince professors to write recommendation letters for me? I am trying to shift graduate schools to change subjects and over the last year I have been studying the new subject in my current graduate school. I have good grades and in collaboration with a few professors and over the last year, I have been working on an insanely hard research question in this new field. The progress is invariably slow.

But I am unable to convince any prof to write recommendation letters for me to do this shift! I don't understanding this. (Does it not count that I started a new subject directly at the grad level and could get good grades and start attacking one of the hardest questions in that field?)

One prof says that if another professor at a different place wants to work with me as their grad student then that prof can contact this prof here to talk about me. Should I take this option in lieu of not getting recommendation letters?
Officially some profs say that they are not comfortable writing letters for someone who doesn't come with the usual background of having done an undergrad in this new subject. (somehow this gap is not offset by me having done some of thee advanced grad courses in this new subject)

In general, when you ask someone to write a letter of recommendation for you and they are unwilling to do so then it is likely that the reason they are unwilling to write a letter of recommendation is because they don't feel that they can write a positive and helpful recommendation letter for you and they don't want to write a negative recommendation letter.

There are many reasons why a letter writer might not be able to write a positive recommendation letter for you, including that they don't think you're well prepared for the program, they don't feel that they're qualified to recommend you for a program outside of their area, they don't feel that your record is sufficient to gain admission to the program in question, or perhaps that they have doubts about your intellectual ability or character.

In any case, it is almost certainly not in your interest to continue to press for a letter of recommendation from them, since you can be pretty sure that the resulting letter of recommendation will not be positive and won't help you in gaining admission to the program that you're applying to.

In particular, you should be aware that your professor could be much more candid (and negative) in a telephone conversation than they might be in a written letter of recommendation.


Can I protect a questionnaire that we've developed against unauthorized use by publishing it somewhere under a license? We're collaborating with another researcher from another institution. Collaborating here means that we do the whole work (study design, questionnaire development and testing etc.) and the other researcher provides access to patients, potential study participants. We usually wait for months for a reply when we have a question and progress is really slow.
Now, there are pretty clear signs that this other researcher may try to take over the whole project and write the publication alone. For me personally, this is not my most important project, but it would still bother me if you would have invested so much time for nothing.
Would it be an option to license our questionnaire to have it as a hostage for the worst case or what would be a good option?
Spoiler: communication is complicated.

Your collaborators shouldn't publish your research without acknowledging, typically with co-authorship, your contribution, since that's plagiarism. If they published anyway, you could notify the publisher.
Legally speaking, the questionnaire will be protected by copyright law (in many countries), which prohibits your collaborators from publishing it.


Competition in department among professors My professor that I've worked for, and other professors that I've met in undergrad, often complain about how it is "publish or death" situation in their department. Specifically, they have told me that they feel like they are under heavy pressure to publish, often having to work for late nights and weekends. It's somewhat ironic because they thought that life would get much easier once they finish PhD and perhaps get a tenure, which is exactly what I'm thinking now.

However, they told me that they are often over-worked and burnt out as well, just like many other PhD students. It might be worst because for many of them, it's been a long marathon, working day and night to obtain PhD, just to compete with many outstanding candidates fighting for limited positions in universities, and if they have successfully secured the job, to work insanely to impress other colleagues and get tenured.

Even for tenured professors, while they won't be fired for not publishing, they have told me that they are often looked down upon if they don't publish many papers in good journals, especially since they are now 'senior researcher' in the department. While these are purely anecdotal with very limited sample, I feel that there might be some truth in their complaints.

My question is: Is it common for professors in university to be under such high pressure and constant competition? Why do people want to go into academia if they are under such stress?

I personally would not want to go into academia, if I know that for the rest of my career, I'd be under constant pressure to outperform others and publish as many papers as possible in the best journals. I may be naive, but I feel that workload in academia easily exceeds that of industry job with fixed 9-5 hours, and I doubt many industry jobs have such fierce competition among the 'best of the best'.

I'm aware that this may be field-dependent, so I'm interested to hear from people's experiences in many fields. I'm currently in US, but I want to hear from experiences in other countries if they have different cultures.

There is always pressure to succeed in life, and further, people who get prestigious jobs are often those who are self-motivated to do exceedingly well.  I've also noticed athletes who cannot have "fun" playing softball or whatnot because they are so upset when they or their teammates play badly.  Unfortunately, these are the types of people who often win in competitive situations.

There are enormous differences between departments both within and across institutions. Believe me, even one crop of PhD students or a year of undergraduates can make things more or less pressured, let alone university or department executives.

Why do people become academics?  Two reasons: because they love what they do, or because they feel like they can't do anything else.  The latter is nuts. If you do not love what you are doing, get out now.  Anyone who can make it to a PhD let alone to faculty can get a good job in industry. But academia really is about getting to spend at least some of your time pursuing and talking about things that really truly interest you, and might change the world.


Is it advisable to submit multiple teaching letters for tenure-track teaching-focused jobs? When applying for academic jobs in the US, one is often asked for at least one recommendation letter from someone who can attest to your teaching abilities.

If applying for a tenure-track teaching focused job, should one aim to have multiple teaching letters?

I am personally in mathematics. I am assuming the answers will not be too field-dependent (please correct me if I am mistaken).

Yes, I think it is advisable, especially if you are coming from a "research track": e.g., if you attended a university rather than a liberal arts college (or especially if your undergraduate degree is outside the US); if you are currently doing a postdoc at a research university, and so forth.

The SLAC [=Small Liberal Arts College] track is its own subcommunity within the academic community.  Though many research-focused academics view the liberal arts track as being an acceptable second choice [in full disclosure: that is a rather faithful description of my own views!], the liberal arts college community does not see itself that way and is very wary of hiring academics whom they suspect (i) will not understand what a liberal arts college really is and turn out to be unhappy and/or bad at the job or (ii) will make good enough faculty members for a few years and then turn around and take a research job at their first opportunity.  If you don't have "SLAC pedigree", then liberal arts colleges will -- correctly, I believe -- view your application with the above wariness.

To get past this wariness you have to demonstrate real understanding of the SLAC track and teaching interest and credentials which are both more intensive and also different from what one is expected / asked to do as a typical university PhD student / university postdoc.  Teaching calc I/II/III every year, getting really good evaluations, and maybe eventually winning a teaching award is not a recipe for success on the liberal arts track.  Whereas many research faculty teach calculus, graduate courses in their specialty, and advanced undergraduate class related to their specialty when they get around to it [again, this describes me pretty well], at SLACs faculty get called upon to teach a much broader course load, often including things that a larger university may not even be housed in the same department (CS, statistics, mathematical biology...).  A good candidate for a SLAC will have a broader teaching experience.

Many research universities nowadays have some "broadening" alternative teaching choices for students and junior faculty interested in this kind of career.  At my department all PhD students start teaching precalculus and then go on to teach calculus.  They can also be involved in a Writing Intensive Program (WIP) and teach elementary education / math for future math teachers courses.  If you are coming from such a place and want to make a good SLAC candidate, nailing your calculus teaching and having teaching experience -- and possibly even additional coursework / mentorship / administrative experience / volunteer work -- in less traditional teaching opportunities is somewhere between extremely helpful and mandatory.  The best way to be convincing in the breadth of your teaching success and skill is to have multiple people write letters about the different aspects of it.  So...yes, two teaching letters sounds wise.

Added: Any additional teaching letters you get should not come at the expense of research letters!  As I wrote in an answer to a related question by the same OP: don't be afraid to send along 1-2 more letters than the application specifies.


Does it make sense to pursue two master's degrees? Quick background: I am currently pursuing two master's degrees, "Data Engineering and Analytics" from TU Munich and "Computer Linguistics" from LMU Munich. I am in my second semester and plan to finish both in 2 1/2 years. The time frame and work load seems reasonable as of now, I am having fun with it and don't work crazy times. Both degrees deal with quite different topics, though they might seem similar. My master's at TUM is very mathy and proof-based. The other master's is rather practical. For the first Master's I'm expecting a 1.7+- and for the second a 1.3+-.
My motivation to do this is mainly based on my wish to pursue a PhD: 1. LMU is very good in (deep) NLP (<- broad description of my research interest) and one of the Prof's work is very interesting, hence I am currently looking for touch points. 2. I personally don't think the Computer Linguistics programm is super sophisticated, the stuff we do is rather shallow so I think knowledge-wise it's not such a huge gain (I consider my TUM master's my "main" work). Here is my question: 3. I want to distinguish myself. I am looking for an internationally renowned Uni for my next step so I am assuming I have high competition. Under these circumstances could you confirm / give your view if pursuing two degrees is a good idea? Should I channel my resources to do something different (e.g. look for actual research experience, publications, etc.), I don't know many people in these fields yet, the Bachelor's programmes in Germany are quite anonymous.

I'd say, having two masters degrees could definitely help you if you consider the 2nd one as a back-up plan (in terms of research fields/directions) if you cannot find a good PhD position in the field relevant for your 1st (main) one. It should, of course, depend on the availability, so ideally, there should be higher competition in the field of the "main" one, and not vice versa.
If you already know that you only want to continue in the field of your "main" one, and see the 2nd as an additional line on your cv, I doubt it is going to help you much, maybe unless your 2nd one is more math-heavy than the 1st one (which is not the case, as I assume from your question). In that regard, considering your 2nd masters direction a back-up plan could be quite smart.
Yet, if your 1st one is more fundamental and your 2nd is more applied, one way I can think of how your 2nd masters could help you obtain a PhD position in the field of the 1st one is: if during your 2nd masters, you learned a specific technique, or software etc, which is highly relevant for the PhD project you are aiming at. There is always a bit of luck involved though, unless you make a thorough analysis of the PhD positions market a few years ahead.


Transforming the PhD thesis to a paper to publish and iThenticate I want my PhD thesis findings to be presented as a scientific pager and get it published in a journal which uses "iThenticate" as plagiarism detection software. When I present my findings, it's unavoidable that I'll use many exact sentences and exact findings from thesis to the paper. So, as I have already published my thesis to the university (the thesis is not available to the public so, only me, university and the turnitin only knows that the thesis exists in this world), will the iThenticate detect my own thesis as self plagiarism? Does "iThenticate" go through the academic thesises submitted via "turnitin" to the university? Because iThenticate only state following as their databases which is not clear for me

60 Billion Web Pages
144 Million Content Items
ProQuest Dissertations
Internal Documents

The only option I see is pay $100.00 USD and buy their one paper credit and check if my thesis is detected by them, but it's a waste of money just to check. Can somebody tell me if they go through thesises? And any other advises for me?

iThenticate might check your paper against your thesis.  Many universities send theses to Proquest, which shares them with iThenticate, as you mentioned.  However, you have no problem.  Most journals allow you to publish parts of your thesis as journal articles. If iThenticate tells the journal your paper is a copy of your thesis, they will ignore this information.

You should check the policies of the journal before you submit your paper to it.


Why do academics publish? It seems as though everyone in academia is trying to publish stuff, regardless of whether they actually have something meaningful to say. The journals generate more noise every year.
I understand that papers count for promotion and review, they mostly get counted but... There is room to question the actual motivation to publish.

What is your primary reason for publishing? How much of it is related to making a meaningful contribution to science/knowledge/understanding, and how much is for other reasons/purposes (tenure, CV, fame, pressure, etc.)?

In the words of Lichtfouse (2013) a research article is above all a communication tool and its purpose is to transfer scientific information from one individual to other individuals.

Publishing a paper is for me the way to show that I am doing research and sharing it with others. But, it is clear that I also am pressured into publishing because promotions and the ability to attract funding relies on publications as a primary evaluation tool. So although I do not publish with the expressed intent of attracting more funding or my own promotions, I am well aware of the spiralling development that is ongoing. I do want to mention that publishing something primarily gives me personally a sense of achievement, that my research is good enough to pass the scrutiny of peers etc. As with, I surmise, mostly everyone else, I thrive from doing a good job and getting a sense of accomplishment. Publishing does that for me.

Whether or not people read my research can be answered by yes and no. Everyone does not read my papers but some who do not should and some who reference my work, really ought to read it, again. On the whole, I think papers get the attention they deserve, some get more and some get less attention than I think is fair. But, since my work gets referenced reasonably often, I think over and under referenced papers average out.

The "pressure to publish" is definitely there and I believe that universities and funding agencies should try to improve the way they evaluate research so as to avoid "salami slicing" and other types of publishing effects. But, how such a system should look is difficult to say although many indices such as the h-index can be used. Since there are no perfect systems, it is perhaps more important to look at the ethical aspects of publishing and make awareness of and discssion on publishing issues better.

Lichtfouse, E., 2013. Scientific writing for impact factor journals. Nova Publishers, New York.


Obtaining a PhD with an original work I was wondering if there still exist universities (in the US or in Europe) where one can obtain a PhD in Philosophy by only presenting an original and well-developed work around a subject or an author.

Yes. Many UK Universities have it in their regulations to permit the award of a degree by prior publication.

However, that does not mean you can just submit your publication and expect to receive a doctorate! The regulations permit the university to recognise someone, usually already associated with the institution, who has made some publication of academic merit made by a non-academic that has received some form of public praise to be rewarded and recognised by the university for their work. This is distinct from a degree honoris causa which may be awarded to honour the person who has done some deed that is not  a publication of equivalent worth to a thesis.

An example, of my personal knowledge, is someone who spent their life studying local flora and published a significant catalogue of plants as an amature botanist. The academic nature of the work was recognised by the University with the award of a Phd by prior publication. I have also known it happen to a local playwright for a lifes work.


Buying a gift for my PhD student after his graduation All posts here on the "graduation gift" subject are about a gift from the PhD candidate to the professor (after the graduation of course). What about a gift for the student from the professor?
My student just graduated, and he really is an exquisite person, he worked more than he probably should have (extra hours, weekends) without me asking, and even with me saying he should not work that much. He was very nice with all the other lab members. I don't know if he will get me something and honestly I don't care. I would like to get him something, for sure a handwritten note to thank him. But I was also thinking to buy him a present, such as a bottle of wine from my country.
I am an Assistant Professor in the USA, but I was not born here. Do you think it will be appropriate to buy and attach a gift to the hand-written note?

I don't see any problem with this. Something from your own country would be appropriate, as would a book that is important in your field. Even a tourist souvenir from your country as something to remember you.
But not too expensive or elaborate.


What would an inclusive curriculum look like in a computer science course? There exists plenty of literature about how to be inclusive, both in the workplace and in the classroom.

I'm wondering how this might be done intentionally — specifically in the context of a computer science class — from a curricular standpoint. I'm thinking of generic intro-to-programming types of courses, which usually include algorithms and data structures.

I have attended several workshops and have read a few articles, but haven't really delved into the literature about inclusivity in the classroom. From these workshops, I am quite comfortable being inclusive in the classroom (lectures, interactions, etc.) -- but I'm looking for ways to have that reach to homework, projects, and so on -- and specifically for computer science as far as possible.

This is an interesting question. The program I am doing most of my teaching in has recently been faced with a similar question (due to comments of an external evaluation), and I can't say we have come up with a satisfying solution yet.

Here are some pointers (in no particular order) that have come up in our discussion:

For exam tasks / homework descriptions: evaluate critically if your tasks (or rather, their descriptions) carry bias. Naturally, you want to avoid the cool developer being called Bob and the silly user Alice or Ahmed, but it goes deeper than that. For example, in an Intro to Programming exam I was giving many years back the task was to model and implement a simulation of a game of football/soccer (the assumption here being that the majority population - white, male college kids in Europe - would be intimately aware of the rules and have an easy time conceptualizing the task). As it turns out, those that did not fall into the majority population (some women, foreign students) did worse on this task, presumably because they needed to spend a lot more brain cycles even understanding the game they were supposed to simulate.
For deadlines: consider that some students may not be able to, if need be, work through the night or the weekend. It's easy to think that a deadline Sunday evening is not a big deal if you think of your students as a homogenious mass of 20-year-olds with no other obligations than to study, but if one of your students is a father / mother of two, or working on the weekend to sustain themselves, the story becomes different.
For extra-curricular activities: the same is also true for extra-curriculars. If at all possible schedule attractive extra-curriculars (e.g., Hackathons, job fairs, whatever your university does) in a way that they can also be attended by people outside the majority population.
For social events: the same applies to social events. Make sure that social events, to the extent possible, not only cater towards the majority population. For instance, when I studied, a lot of the student social events boiled down to "find an excuse to drink", and basically all conversation was in the local language. Both of this together unsurprisingly meant that foreign students, especially Islamic students, never showed up.
Avoiding "hidden knowledge": in many universities and courses, there are official rules and "unspoken rules". For example, a teacher may say that students are expected to learn the entire book, but well-connected members of the majority population know from previous years that in reality most of the questions are about Chapters 3-8. Given that (some) minorities are less well-connected than the majority population, these constructions can disadvantage these students severely.
Diversity of TAs: ensure that not all TAs are always from the majority population (i.e., ensure that there is some amount of representation of non-majority students). This may need active steering, because if you just take the first 5 qualified students, you may easily end up with only students from the majority population (because they are more, because they are better-connected, and because a lot of TA contracts are written in a way to appeal to 20-year-olds).

To summarize: keep in mind that some of your students may have a different cultural background, different life constraints, different priorities, or different access to "common knowledge". Try to level the playing field as well as you can.


How important is the Ph.D. Thesis? It may sound an insincere question but bear with me, please.

I am just starting to write my thesis. I got some good publications along the way, and I have a couple under review which I hope will get accepted in tier 1 journals. So the question is, does the thesis in itself add a lot of value to my Ph.D.? Or is it necessary just as part of the formalities?

Also, two related questions are

How do the thesis reviewers' expectation/judgement differ from the journal reviewers' expectation? Obviously, it is the same people usually. But when you (as a faculty) review a thesis, do you look for the same elements as when you review for a Tier I journal?
If the candidate has good publications, does that make you, in want of a better word, go somewhat easy on the thesis?

My professor is, of course, not letting me take it somewhat lightly. I understand where is he coming from since his colleagues will ultimately examine the thesis. But off the record, how critical is the thesis for my career after the defence is over?

How important is the Ph.D. Thesis?

It depends on what you have in mind for "importance".  The intellectual content of the thesis is vitally important, since it stands for what you have accomplished in graduate school.  You should make sure it contains your best work, since early in your career you'll be judged partly on this basis.

In the long run, there is little direct value to the dissertation as a document.  (Aside from any sentimental value, laying out the historical record, and satisfying bureaucratic requirements.)  Any valuable content should be published, and the resulting publications will be the definitive source that the community will rely on in the future.  If people are still reading your thesis five years after your graduate, then that's a sign that you have not done an adequate job of publishing your work.

Opinions differ on how seriously to take the dissertation as a specialized form of academic writing.  For example, how much additional background, commentary, or literature review should it contain?  Should it be written in a different style from published papers?  This can vary between countries, fields, universities, departments, and even individual advisors.  There's no universal answer, and you'll have to investigate what fits your particular circumstances.

In particular, one fundamental question is whether your dissertation is nothing more than an account of research that has been or will be published, or whether it's an important academic exercise in which you demonstrate your perspective and thoroughness in a way that would not fit in a conventional paper.

I see the former as the default answer for mathematics in the U.S., but the latter is not completely unknown.  (There are advisors who insist that their students write far more detailed proofs in the dissertation than one would ever actually publish, to demonstrate that the student can in fact do this.)


How to maximize the benefit of an exchange opportunity during PhD My supervisor has asked me to stay in a lab in a foreign country for a few months. That lab has some collaboration with us but their research is actually not related to mine. I don't know why my supervisor asked me to go, but I think it would be a great chance to broaden my experience so I did not complaint.

Besides travelling around the city and knowing new friends, what should I prepare and what should I do there to utilize this opportunity to help my PhD? I hope this opportunity can both benefit me academically and personally.

This is standard practice in Denmark (where I'm currently located). All PhD students are essentially required to spend 3-6 months at a foreign institution. Similarly we host a large number of PhD students in our department for stays of about this length. So, this is a question that's pretty relevant.

To take advantage of this opportunity you have to think about what you personally hope to get out of it. I'd say there are several possibilities:

Discussing your research with people outside of your lab and narrow subfield. This can be a great opportunity to get novel feedback and insights. But, you need to make sure you actually have the chance to do this. Does the lab you're going to have regular meetings? Do you have a chance to present your work? Will you be able to go to local workshops/meetings/conferences at the host institution? We sometimes have students who end up not getting a lot of face time with members of their host institutions, which is unfortunate and you want to avoid that.
Learning whether there are other areas of your discipline that are interesting besides what you're currently working. Presumably after you're done with your PhD you'll have to move somewhere else. This may require you "branch out" slightly from your current research work into related areas. This might be a good opportunity to learn about somewhat related work and get some knowledge that might help you start a new project, or land a postdoc or assistant professorship in the future.
Getting a feel for another department. All departments and labs are different. They have different culture, different norms, different levels of social interaction, etc. This is a great time to see how another lab/department/university works and via that experience get some insight into aspects of that environment (and your home institution) that you do and do not like. This can be valuable for deciding what kind of environments you'd like to be part of in the future.
Networking. Going to another institution is a great way to broaden your network. But, you need to make sure you'll actually get a chance to meet people. You don't want to end up going somewhere and just sitting in your office the whole time alone. Make sure there's a network of PhD students you can meet while you there and that you make a concerted effort to meet with faculty. And, outside of work, try to make some friends.

So, to prepare, figure out what you want to get out of the experience and then make sure the institution can satisfy those things (and, as part of that, try to setup the desired opportunities in advanced by scheduling meetings, etc.).


Keyword tagging across scientific papers making it searchable One year into the research project I have now a nearly exhaustive list of keywords / themes characterising my topic. There are about 100 words, though some of them are so closely related that probably this can be a little bit reduced. However there are nuances, so for what it is worth I would like to keep it for now.

The plan is now to be able to go through all the literature again and tag the keywords when they or a close synonym is mentioned in the text.

I have most of the literature in PDF, though some items are old school books. Now what I would like is eventually to have a search function where I can then search for a keyword and it finds all the text items where I tagged it.

The keyword system of Citavi is close, but not quite. OneNote is great for searching, but pulling in 300 PDF research papers into OneNote is simply no option. What would be best is an annotation Program for PDF, that saves notes in a database format, e.g. saving 'Note Bla bla bla,Keywords abc, file X, page 7, line 20'

Whilst that is wishful thinking, thousands of people have come before me and tried to figure out this personal knowledgebase research thing, so I am a bit surprised there is no software for this, and all the discussions either peddle reference tools (Mendeley, Zotero) or Mindmapping (Xmind, …) which are really addressing different concerns.

I also want to keep the original paper and my notes separate.

Any thoughts / suggestions ?

You could look into a noSLQ database. ElasticSearch or SOLR come to mind immediately. Most cloud services also offer their own flavors of this(DynamoDB on AWS for example). The solution could be designed to retain the original content, your notes (both searchable also), and your classification system. Most of these systems should have plugins to import various file formats directly.


Is acceptable for international conferences to use your own simulator in your paper? I want to propose some approaches in wireless networks and I want to simulate it to prove that it is better than others; but I don't want use commonly-used simulators and I want to create new simulator according to requirements. Is there any difference in paper acceptance for international conferences to use your own simulator or famous simulators?

The important thing is to use the right tool for the job, and justify it.

The existing simulators have the following advantage: a great deal of time and effort went into their development, and they have been used, debugged, and extended by many people. Therefore, they are likely to be more complete and/or more accurate than anything you could come up with on your own in a reasonable amount of time.

However, if you have a compelling reason why these are not suitable for the particular bit of research you want to do, by all means write your own simulator; but you should be able to justify this in your paper.

For some objective numbers, I refer you to this survey of papers published in MobiHoc from 2000-2005. 80 of the 114 papers that used simulations stated what simulator they used. From those, 22/80 said they used "self-developed or custom simulators" (27.3%).


What happens to the application materials sent/submitted with graduate school applications in US after admissions decisions are made? After the admission decisions are announced, accepted students made their decision, and the list of next year's graduate class is determined, what do graduate schools and respective departments in US universities typically do with the application materials (electronic or paper), including recommendation letters, transcripts and score reports, that they received from each individual applicant, in particular, rejected applications?

Do they keep them, in their entirety, for future reference or statistics? For how long, typically? Or, do they keep a summary of each application and the reasons for rejection and discard the rest?

At our school, we never keep written reasons for acceptance or rejection. These are made in a final faculty meeting with voice votes of yays and nays for each candidate that made it to the semi-finalist list.  Only the finalist list is recorded.

As to materials, they were shredded sometime after admissions season is over. It's a moot point now that everything is electronic.


Asking for recommendation letter from manager for graduate school I asked a mentor on my research team to write my letter, but he has not been responsive (he normally is terrible at keeping up with e-mails, this is no different). My manager only saw the high-level aspects of my research, but the mentor isn't responding and asking my manager might prompt my mentor to help him write the letter.

Is this a good way of approaching the situation? If not, what would be a better way?

It seems reasonable to me, especially since rec letters are typically on a hard deadline. Worst-case, line up another recommender in case the one you hope for doesn't come through.

Slightly tangential, but... I've noticed a few things about rec letters from people outside academe that can make them harder to take seriously:

Extremely brief -- like, five sentences or fewer brief. Cover-letter length is more desirable.
Vague and general, not giving a strong impression of the applicant's specific individual potential
Make mention only of very low-level skills and abilities (e.g. showing up to work on time -- nice to know, but not exactly helpful in an admissions decision)

You may want to coach your recommender a bit, carefully and politely, about things it would be useful for them to say. You don't have to ghostwrite (and probably shouldn't; that's on the razor edge of ethics), but you can ethically suggest anecdotes about your work, or projects you've done, that you think say something unique, positive, and discipline-relevant about you.


Is there a quick way to search for a given researcher's past collaborators/co-authors? Is there a website or software for one to search for all the past co-authors/collaborators of a given researcher?

I can of course go through the researcher's publication and get the names one by one, but just wonder if there is a shortcut way of doing this.

For researchers in computer science, another approach is to use DBLP, which is free. For example, this is the coauthor list for me on my DBLP page. It is reached by going to the researcher page at DBLP, and then clicking the little 'people' icon on the right hand side.


Getting into an engineering or physics graduate program with a C in Calculus 1 and 2 I am a physics major in my second year. I do well in Physics, but math is my weak point. I struggle through it, I understand it, but my grades are poor. I am interested in studying specifically aerospace in grad school if I can (that's a separate matter). Would graduate admissions turn me down if they see poor Calc 1 and 2 grades?

Graduate admissions are generally based on a complete record, and depend less on the details of specific courses than they do on an evaluation of your potential for success. You need to build that complete record and a few C's are a negative factor that you need to overcome. There are various ways to do that. One is to just move on and do better, perhaps learning more about calculus on your own, perhaps just taking more advanced courses and doing well there.

If you continue to get C's in math it will be a problem. If you get good grades, especially in those subjects that use calculus it is less likely to matter.

But even more important is to impress your professors with your hard work and potential.

Short answer - the C's won't slam the door, but you need effective ways to open it wider.


How do I get editing help for technical (mathematic/statistic) paper publishing? I have several topics that I would like to publish. While I can get a paper, in technical terms, 100% of the way done I am not an English major. I don't do great at speaking human, or dotting my "i"'s. I could be much more productive if I had help.

I am currently not affiliated with a university or academic institution. I work and on the side I sometimes do some thinking or work on (statistically) fun problems. I would like to share the results in an approved and excellent forum.

How does one go about finding someone with that strength to help edit (or is it co-author) articles with the intention of publishing them in decent to great peer-reviewed publications? Are there any culture-known "best known methods"? Are there negative repercussions of having non-mathematical technical help? If so, what?

I suggest these four steps:

Identify your research community. The problems you are working on should have some connections with previous works. If not, it will be hard to publish your work anywhere, because it is harder to draw the attention of other researchers on your topic. You can use search engines such as Google Scholar for this purpose.
It is likely that the authors of these papers use the same notations, publish in the same journals and use a similar article structure to describe their work. Become familiar with the format by reading related articles.
Write down a draft, following the usual format of your field. If your English is weak, you can ask someone to fix your mistakes (he/she should not need to be familiar with your work, but it is easier if he/she has some scientific background).
Contact a researcher working on close topics, asking him/her for feedback on your draft. If the feedback is positive, a collaboration might be possible.

I have followed these steps and this has lead me to my first research paper (co-authored with my "mentor"). It takes a lot of time but it is worth the effort.