What does "external reviewer" mean for a computer science conference? I've seen the term "external reviewer" used in someone's CV for conference reviewing in computer science. Does this mean the person officially reviews the paper for the conference, or he/she gets a request to review from someone who officially reviews the paper?

Conferences are organized differently in different subfield of computer science; my answer describes the situation in theory.

At theoretical computer science conferences, the program committees are relatively small, in part because submissions from program committee members are strictly forbidden.  Each submitted paper is assigned to 2-4 PC members to review; for a typical conference this means each PC member is assigned 25-50 papers to review.  Reviewing that many papers is a huge burden, and despite a preliminary bidding process, every PC member is assigned at least a few papers outside their areas of expertise.  So PC members regularly solicit reviews from people outside the committee whose expertise better matches a given paper.  Those people are external reviewers.

Normally each PC member tries to gets a different external reviewer for each paper (except the papers they review on their own), but a single external reviewer might get papers from multiple PC members.

(In other communities, what I call "PC members" are called "area chairs", and what I'm calling "external reviewers" are called "PC members".)

  Does this mean the person officially reviews the paper for the conference, or he/she gets a request to review from someone who officially reviews the paper?

Both.

A list of all external reviewers is typically included in the conference proceedings just after the table of contents (for example) as official acknowledgement of their service.

On the other hand, PC members are expected to use the external reviews they solicit as guidelines, not as substitutes for their own judgement, especially when comparing submissions that were reviewed by different people.


USA - Undergraduate Final Transcripts and PhD Programs I am curious about how final transcripts play a role in a graduate program that has already accepted you. For example, if a student with a 3.02 cumulative GPA was accepted into a Physics Ph.D. program that requires a 3.0 cumulative GPA, but does poorly during their last semester of undergraduate classes so their cumulative GPA falls to a 2.98 while still passing all their classes.  Would this student be subject to rejection from the Ph.D. program if they were already accepted into?

I am not in this situation, I am just curious what the implications are for doing poorly on your last semester of an undergraduate degree after having already been accepted into a Ph.D./Masters program.

Thank you!

There are no "laws" that describe what schools can do in such situations. Everything depends on how strictly the department obeys whatever regulations are in place. Some may say it only counts when the decision is made, and others will insist on it being valid at the time of degree completion. Many schools do not have strict GPA cutoffs for admission, in which case the issue is moot.

In general, though, I don't think I've heard of a school withdrawing an offer because of a small change in GPA. Usually it's when someone contracts "terminal senioritis" and has their GPA fall drastically after the admission offer is made.


A LinkedIn Recommendation as compared to an Academic Recommendation In what ways would a Professor's LinkedIn Recommendation differ from his Recommendation for Graduate School(Masters/PhD)?

In other words: In what was does the visibility of a Recommendation change a Professor's Recommendation?

I believe they are totally different.

LinkedIn recommendation is more towards the visibility of student's soft/technical skills in general while the official letter of recommendation should address the student skills in a more academic/depth way.
Their audience is different. Recommendation Letter is intended to particular institute/committee while LinkedIn is more to the public general and industry recruiters in particular.
LinkedIn recommendations counts nothing for the admission committees while might have good impact on industry recruiters.

In short: Academia:- Recommendation Letters. Industry: doesn't hurt to let your supervisor recommending you - if they do have account on LinkedIn :-)


Supervisor's behaviour changed after I decided to move to industry As any other late-stage PhD student, I am applying for jobs. But I noticed that my supervisor's behaviour changed a bit after she heard that I want to go to industry, although she has been a great admirer of my work and encouraging me to pursue my academic work. I was wondering if I should be concerned about this or just let it go?

The story: I applied for a few academic positions and my applications were not successful. So, I decided to apply for some non-academic jobs in the industry. Fortunately, my applications received good attention in the industry and I was invited to a few interviews. Particularly, one of the companies responded very quickly. They have even called my references immediately after interviews. I felt that my supervisor's behaviour has changed ever since I told her about this. She saw me on the campus and coldly told me: "I just answered a phone call for you.".

Meanwhile, I received two interview invitations in academic positions, and the interviews went quite well. But the areas are not much relevant to my previous research, so, I am a bit hesitant about them (although they are really excellent positions). Besides, the industry offer is much more generous from the financial aspect.

I was wondering if I should be concerned about my supervisor's behaviour or it is a normal thing? Have I done something wrong?

Most people would not consider you to have done anything wrong in applying to industry - but your supervisor might, because some academics consider non-academic careers to be "second-best".

However, are you sure that the change in attitude is because of this? Could it simply be that you put your supervisor down as a referee without telling them about it? That might be considered rude, leading to surprise at getting a phone call about you.


How do I respond to a review of the wrong version of my paper? I have just had the revised version of a paper rejected from a well respected journal.  However, one of the reviews is clearly a review of the original draft of the paper, rather than the revised version.  I pointed this out to the editor, and his response was

  Please revise your paper again, and submit it as a new paper, by mentioning your old paper ID number, together with replies to reviewers.

I don't see how I can reply to that review.  How should I proceed?

Consider the pragmatic approach to this issue: you have already revised the paper according the reviewer’s suggestions, so only the response needs to be worked on. (Apart from other comments orthogonal to this main issue.)

Given that you already called the attention of the editor on the problem and he did not follow up on it, you clearly need to weigh carefully your response (unless you want to pick up a fight). I would suggest that you write a very detailed response letter, in which you explain how the manuscript addresses the reviewer's comments and questions. Do it point by point, quoting all the parts of your manuscript that are relevant (and locating them: page and line numbers).

Just do so by being slightly evasive about the exact evolution of the manuscript. Where you would normally say “we have added a paragraph at the end of section B”, just say “the revised manuscript includes a paragraph addressing the reviewer's question at the end of section B”. It's not untrue, though it is not perfectly clear.

Also, consider going for another journal. If you believe the editor has been treating somewhat badly, you might want to just let it drop and submit somewhere else. It's a complex decision.

Or, if you think it's worth it: make a stand for it. Appeal the editor's decision to the editor in chief, on the basis that a factual error was made. You need to be both strong and diplomatic in your appeal, and back it up heavily with facts. It will be easier if the incriminated review actually quotes some text that has changed in your revised manuscript, in which case the error is evident.


Writing a series of papers I'm writing a series of three papers. Each paper I'm writing contains two parts (part A + part X), where part A is a new technology and part X is the field of applying it. Part A is common in all the three papers while part X (the field) is variable according to the field the paper discusses.

Can I use the resources of part A in the same arrangement (but with different paraphrasing) in all three papers, or should I get different resources for the same information in part A for all of them?

my question here represent my intention to understand the scientific logic not to suggest bad solution because i am a beginner still .

It sounds to me like you are trying to game the system by publishing Part A three times simultaneously with revisions to the wording to claim it is not self-plagiarized.

Assuming Part A is important, which it seems to be because you are describing it as a new technology, you seem to be trying to get three journals to think they are each the first to publish that new technology, when in fact they are not. This is unethical.

If all the applications are relevant, you should publish whichever your favorite one is with Part A, and then submit separate papers citing that paper that show the results with the other applications. These works will likely repeat some of Part A, but only as much as is needed to explain it for that application.

However, this is something best discussed with your academic advisor.


Would transferring to a better school in the middle of a graduate program irreparably hurt my professional connections and academic reputation? I did not get accepted into any good graduate programs.  For various reasons, I feel I could do much better if I reapplied next year.  This question isn't about the feasibility of doing so, but of the affect on my professional reputation and network.

It is an investment for the university to give me funding, so it would be a jerk move to transfer simply for the increase in prestige.  But how much of a jerk move would it be?  Would it burn my colleagues and advisors so hard that I would scar my reputation for the rest of my career?  Would I simply lose these people as connections, but have no lasting affect other than that?  Or would everyone be understanding that this is a professional choice, that I am looking out for my future?  (If so, could I request recommendations from professors in the program?)

  If I transfer to a better school either at the end of my first or second year as a graduate student, how much will this piss people off?

To be clear, I am talking about transferring from a mid-ranked state school to somewhere good, at least top 20 hopefully top 10.  And since I am sure this matters, the discipline is mathematics.

This is fine. Don't feel guilty at all. I say this as a math professor at a mid-ranked state school, who has written rec letters for students who, for various reasons, wanted to transfer out.

Be sure not to speak ill of the place you're leaving, but you owe it to yourself to seek out the best opportunities available. Good luck!


Who should be first author? Theory person or Experiment person? The situation:

Two PhD students named 'Theory' and 'Experiment' are working on a project. Both are experimentalists by training but, from experiences working on a separate project, Theory comes up with an idea for a new experiment. Positive results from this experiment would have a small but significant impact on their field. However, Theory does not have expertise on the particular instrument required to conduct the experiment so, with the blessing of their adviser, Theory enlists Experiment who is an expert at using the instrument. Theory guides the experiment but the execution is all done by Experiment.

Happily, the results are positive!

The question is, given that Theory and Experiment agree to share first authorship, who should be listed first?

Edit: after writing this I found this thread
Had the idea vs. did the work: Who should be the lead author? which is very similar to this question.

There's also an interesting discussion of the issue in this blog: https://funkdoctorx.wordpress.com/2012/02/27/co-first-author-and-cvs/

Shared first authors are listed alphabethically, at least that's what makes sense, otherwise they are not shared first authors!! I'd go with that no doubt.

From your comments I would say that your are the Experiment person, as you seem to be diminishing the role of the Theory person (he/she simply did so and so...).

From your description, the Theory person came up with the idea and guided the experiments, while the Experiment person simply run the experiments. As a general principle, I would tend to side with the Theory person (Peter's answer here seems to corroborate my view). I believe it also matters who is going to write most of the paper, which you do not mention.

However, as we are all a bunch of strangers on the internet, there's no actual way of knowing which is the case (the idea may be too simple or the experiment may be very complex, and so on...). The best thing to do would be to talk to your supervisor.

Most importantly, don't cling on unimportant details, as you already have a shared first-author status. Move on. This is the kind of meaningless thing that can ruin a scientific collaboration for good.


How should I describe the "relationship" between me and postdoc in our lab if I am getting recomendation letter from her? How should I describe the relationship between me and postdoc in our lab if I am getting recommendation letter for phD admission?
Advisor? Superviser? reasearch advisor?...
She has a title of research professor.

Assuming this person is not formally your manager nor supervisor, the correct term would be colleague.


How might I get hold of a dataset from an old paper? Say I come across a paper e.g. from 1980, which refers to a dataset which I believe could have further interesting information that was not analysed (or at least the analysis was never published). This was long before the time when datasets might be included as supplementary information. The sole author has not published recently (10 years +) and I can’t find any reference to them at the listed institution or indeed anywhere else. They are likely retired, quite possibly passed away by now.

Given that the author is no longer contactable, is there any way of getting hold of that old dataset? My instinct is that the answer is “no”, but is there any hope? How could I go about it?

Lots of old datasets still exist and are stored in repositories, exactly to solve the problem you face. So my first port of call would be to look there. Which one depends on your discipline.

If that is not the case you can try track down her or his PhD students from that time. Chances are they worked with that data, and may know what happened to it.

Sometimes data is just lost. I remember a case where data was stored on punch cards in a university cellar, and there were also mice that liked eating cardboard in that cellar...


Should I send an email back after getting rejected for a Master Project? Planning to do a Master degree in Canada but my professor is not planning to take in any students for the upcoming year. Should I send an email back or just leave it as it is? If I should send one back, what is the proper way of writing one?

You never lose by being polite - especially to people who can possibly help you in the future. I would suggest sending an email, or even postal mail - a bit more formal.

The email/note should be short. Thanks for your consideration of my application. I appreciate your help and hope to be able to work with you in the future.

If you need a project from another professor, you could also ask him/her for any advice or recommendations they might have.

Don't burn your bridges. Don't let them fall into disrepair. Keep them tidy and well swept.


Can you study and contribute to physics if you are a mathematician? I'm an undergraduate student majoring in mathematics; I totally love it and I want to get Ph.D in pure mathematics.

I'm also interested in physics, especially the theoretical field; my favorite areas are relativity and quantum theory. Of course, I'm more into mathematics than physics, that is why I majored in math; plus I don't get as high grades in physics as I do in math.

Now here is my question, if I became a mathematician, can I switch to physics easily if I wanted to? I heard a lot about mathematicians contributing to string theory and other areas. I guess what I'm looking for is not a total switch to another field; rather it's more like the ability to learn more about physics easily and being able to contribute to the theories.

What I meant was that I want my Ph.D to be in pure math; in essence my focus would be on math. But also I want to study the stuff that interests me in physics, e.g. GR, String theory, etc. I'm asking if it's possible for a professional mathematician to

study these subjects in depth without much difficulties; and I'm referring to difficulties in getting enrolled in classes and being able to handle them, and
be able to contribute to these fields

I'm sorry English isn't my first language, I hope I made my question clear.

Yes, technically speaking, you can cross the fence -- either direction -- between those two disciplines, but be aware of their different agendas.

Physics uses the language of mathematics to construct mathematical models of reality, but the physics is really contained in the following three non-mathematical tasks:

Establishing the association between mathematical symbols and reality (interpretation of the mathematical models).
Verifying the validity of the conceived mathematical models (physical theory verification).
Establishing their limits of validity.

You can be a great mathematician, but if you fail in understanding the above not-so-easy tasks, you will be a bad physicist.


Is age a hindrance of getting acceptance in a PhD program? Is age a hindrance of getting acceptance in a PhD program?

For instance, what if a student applies at the age of 45 for an admission?

I think you can rest easy (and work hard). There are a lot of people who decide to work toward a doctorate later in life. Depending on what your background is, you can bring a lot of experience to the process.

While most programs depend on a certain amount of knowledge in the field that undergraduates normally come with, mostly breadth and a bit of depth, a person who has worked in a field and kept up with the changes required of a professional probably won't be handicapped.

However, as with anyone else, you need to make a case that you are both prepared and have the drive to plunge deeply into research. Everyone is a bit different, but age, itself, is no barrier.


Ordering Chemicals for a laboratory on a Student or J1 Visa I just wanted to ask, if any time, any of you have had any issues ordering hazardous chemicals in a laboratory located in the US.

Specially if you had any of your students or postdocs do it, since I recently saw that they run a background check on you for certain chemicals, so I was just wondering if this may backfire sometime in the nearby future.

I ask this because my PI had me order a couple of chemicals, but my Postdoc is in computer science, so not at all related with this, I wanted to know if this may jump in some future in a Green Card application? Perhaps I'm just being paranoid.

Do you have any experience in your laboratories with this kind of issues?

Thank you

If you mean order as in "sorting the bottles", then you anyways shouldn't do that unless you have the proper training so you know what you are doing. If I should give a paranoid guess: getting the training would have been the point that got you listed as owner of a "hazardous chemicals certificate". That's much easier from a large scale administrative point of view than knowing who entered which lab to touch a bottle at a nation-wide scale.
If you mean order as in "administrative task to buy things": This type of ordering does not imply physical access to the substances. Lists of people who do that would be full of secretaries and administrative/procurement/bookkeeping staff.
If you're trying to be paranoid: the other thing that is much easier to know than who actually enterd a particular lab is who is working in that group/building. From that point of view, you may already be listed as "possibly had access to X" if anyone from your lab does the order.

(Disclaimer: I'm German and in Germany and not overly worried what types of US visa I can have. However, I'm chemist, so if they list people in relation to harzardous substances, I'd expect to be listed by profession [or by my publication list/affiliations] anyways - even though taking also into account the amounts the most important hazardous substances I usually handle are alcohol/bacillol for cleaning instruments and the lab table.)


justify the interview development, and validation or testing methods Is it common/reasonable for reviewers to ask for including a justification or clarification of interview scrip development, and inquire about piloting, or testing the interviews?

Yes, a reviewer can always ask evidence to justify your sayings to escape from the blames such as if any mistakes found later after the publication. So it is up to the author whether he/she incorporates those evidences/ justifications in the manuscript or as supplements or by giving clarifications to the reviewer.


Were the duration of Bachelor's, Master's and PhD degrees different in the U.S. 100 years ago? Given that there were much less to learn 100 years ago, was the duration of degrees shorter then than it is now?

In the U.S., the Ph.D. is longer now on average, especially in the sciences because of the influx of money for paid research, the use of grad students to do research, professors as almost pure managers and grant funders versus real working scientists, etc. It has become something like Renaissance painting done by subordinates.  Except I still think the painters got their hands dirty and gave instruction.
There is almost no apprenticeship in R1 science from the professor, just other students and perhaps post docs. It is essentially about milking the grad student for results to get more grants, travel, promotions, grow the empire, etc.  Thus the expectation for work product has gone up.  Add onto that, that the money has enabled way more actual Ph.D.s to exist, but not increased the number of geniuses in the population and fundamental advances are if anything harder as simple much of the low hanging fruit is plucked.  And you have a situation of volume of result being emphasized.  Not the trainee education.
And enjoy the job market at the end...
All that said, if you sniff around you can find profs or even departments that still emphasize the classic 4 years.  But you will have to search. It is abnormal now.


Value of PhD candidacy ("ABD") If one is intending on leaving a graduate program before completing their PhD, is there value in obtaining candidacy status before leaving?

Does it depend on where they are leaving to? If so, consider the cases where the candidate is either leaving for industry or leaving for another PhD position. (And say they are contractually obligated to not leave immediately, so they would have time to reach candidacy.)

For some departments, reaching the candidacy stage means you have earned a degree (often an MPhil, but it varies). If your department gives a degree when you reach candidacy, then it provides a nice break point to leave. Industry might be fooled by it, but PhD programs often know the difference between degrees that you were intending on getting and those that signify a departure from original plans. A degree might have some value Thor industry and PhD admissions, but in general, people are interested in what you have done and can do, and not in pieces of paper. If there is no degree, then reaching candidacy, doesn't really matter for industry or PhD admissions.

While it might not help for getting a job or another PhD, reaching candidacy might give you a sense of closure and/or accomplishment. The value of that is deeply personal, but a lot of people describe themselves as being ABD even if they have no intention of finishing. You need to weight the value of being ABD against the cost of getting there. Often reaching candidacy means taking qualifying exams. Quals can be really hard and if you are not 100% committed you could fail! which might be worse for your psyche. I am not sure anyone goes into quals thinking, I am going to pass and then quit. Did I mention quals are painful. I have since forgotten all my coursework scars, but my qualifying exam scar I think is with me for life.


Customary to offer a fellow academic a chance to rebut criticism in a paper? If I write I paper in which I criticise a view or argument expressed by another author, is it considered polite or customary to offer the author an advanced/draft copy of my paper?

My criticisms are of course at an academic rather than personal level.

This seems very field-specific.  In some fields -- e.g. philosophy -- "criticizing the work of others" is more than business as usual: it's a substantial part of what all papers in the subject do.  (Philosophy is probably the extreme case: though I am far from an expert in this area, I do have some familiarity with it, and my understanding is that a truly correct and unassailable philosophical argument would in most cases serve to show that the problem was not really philosophical at all!  This is a field in which the rank and file philosophers of today criticize the golden gods of the past two thousand years as well as each other...and everyone seems pretty happy about it.)  In certain other fields there is the sense -- and this can only be meant sociologically without opening up some truly deep cans of worms -- that "right" and "wrong" work is not a matter of individual opinion or belief: it is something that the community as whole must come to an agreement on.  For instance, two scholars can happily present rival theories on the meaning of Hamlet or even on its authorship.  Two scholars who report inconsistent physical experiments cannot coexist so happily: the community as a whole has a strong feeling that at least one of the experiments must be wrong.

If you are just presenting a rival theory to someone else's in the sense of philosophy or the humanities -- i.e., the community as a whole will have no a priori problem with allowing the two theories to exist and each gain their own adherents -- then it seems to me that this is business as usual and everyone can read about it in the paper.  But if you are working in a scientific, mathematical or other field in which the two works cannot coexist simultaneously in the community as a whole, then you are doing something that is potentially much more destructive to the other person.  This doesn't mean that you shouldn't do it -- on the contrary, if anything you are more obligated to bring the issue to light -- but I think it would be at least courteous to personally contact the person whose work would be specifically invalidated by yours.  On the other hand, whether something is "courteous" is clearly a matter of culture.  I think that scientific fields vary widely on whether and how discourteous this practice is.  For instance, there are some fields -- e.g. string theory -- in which large numbers of people are working within a very small and rapidly moving space.  In this kind of situation, it is my understanding that you just take a good, rapid shot and see how everyone else reacts to it.  If on Wednesday two contradictory string theory papers show up on the arxiv, then you know what people will be doing on Thursday: in other words, the community is so automatically and rapidly self-correcting that people think in terms of "good ideas that didn't pan out" rather
than "wrong papers".  Or so is my understanding anyway: string theory is quite an amazing field to me because it is technically so similar but sociologically so different from my own.

In my field -- mathematics -- the culture regards my publishing a paper saying "Your paper is wrong" as an extreme act to be avoided at many costs.  Much better would be for you to publish an erratum/corrigendum/retraction saying "Unfortunately the result I stated before is wrong; I thank [you] for bringing this to my attention."  Publishing a paper -- or even circulating a preprint, say on the arxiv -- saying that Author X's work without making any attempt to contact Author X would be regarded by some as being discourteous to Author X.  It could also be a strategically poor decision in some circumstances: when this happens, very likely some part of the community will mobilize to figure out "as a whole" who is right, you or Author X (or neither!).  This mobilization will probably involve several people having conversations with both you and Author X, to the extent that you may end up talking to each other through other people.  It could be more efficient and more seemly to have that conversation directly and privately with Author X.  In particular, for better or for worse (and I think it is somewhat for worse) if you publish a paper saying "Author X is wrong" and you turn out to be wrong, then you may acquire a reputation for being a bit of a troublemaker.

Finally, in very technical fields, it is often the case that the unique person who is maximally well equipped to resolve the discrepancy between your work and Author X's is...Author X.  So unless you have some reason to think otherwise, availing yourself of this resource sooner rather than later is probably a good idea.


How to pick a PhD topic? I have been offered an opportunity for a part time PhD in Computer Science. I have had brief conversation with the person that would be my advisor. He has suggested that I start to think of a topic/proposal.

I literally have no idea where to start, what level of detail I should be looking at for a proposal?

I have read a couple of the articles on this site like: How to find a good topic for a PhD research proposal?

These all offer great advise. Maybe I'm missing something but I am starting to feel a bit overwhelmed already!

One idea I have had is modelling student success based on different factors like: home environment, past student success, etc.

All I keep thinking of is the advisor said "It needs to be something new".

I guess any advise on creating a research proposal, picking a topic, where to begin... would be great.

You mentioned the problem: "It needs to be something new". That's not only highly unspecific, but also extremely hard to gauge by a prospective PhD student.

Sure, you can start reading articles/conference proceedings and try to find interesting questions (e.g., what these authors mentioned as open questions). But in my experience, you need to be working in a domain/field to really get an idea which questions/problems are interesting and worth-while to answer/solve. After all, the research the papers are based on is usually at least a year old and conferences proceedings aren't that much up-to-date. So the person who likely can tell you whether something is new is your adviser, if s/he is actively doing research. A good adviser, who is part of the research community (visits conferences, works with other researchers, does peer-reviews for journals and conferences) should know what the other researchers work on (and thus reduce the risk that you get scooped half-way in your thesis) and guide you where you can make a contribution.

If you really want to work with this adviser, one way would be to check his/her publications and look for interesting topics/open questions. You could go from there and state your interest and ask him/her for possible directions where you can take his/her previous research. While the work has to be new and it must be your work, in my opinion it really helps to have a content expert to get started and to get good feedback. After all, I would consider a PhD an apprenticeship, not something you should do solo.


How to conduct academic research across different fields as a undergrad? I'm a freshman computer engineering major doing a summer research internship at a large public metropolitan university . My internship is a bit unusual. My internship is based in a Latino Studies Research Institute, and my research for the summer concerns using machine learning methods to statistically  analyze possible correlations between race and socioeconomic status in certain Latino groups. This is my first time conducting research, and I'm a bit lost.

For example, my research advisor told me I'm looking into a new area of  (which surprised me heavily) since nobody has ever approached that area in the way that I'm before. Basically, my research won't be heavily conclusive (I'm working with only a few hundred data-points, a threadbare amount). I intend for my paper to at least get some interest in using machine learning for social science/ethnic studies.

Also, I'm unsupervised. I basically come in everyday and look for machine learning algorithms to better fit my data, along with more information for the qualitative aspects of my soon to be report. And for the most part, besides a research associate who is a statistician, I'm left to do the grunt work of looking up all the programming and statistical techniques for my project. Also, the professor that I was recommended to talk to isn't in the same field as me ( he's in Environmental Engineering ), so I don't know what to do from there.

So, I would like to know -

As a undergrad researcher whos conducting research in a field that is not my major, what is expected of me? I'm a Computer Engineering major in a Sociological/Ethnic Studies Research Institute.

How can I bring up issues to my adviser? Sometimes it feels like I'm being left out to do my own research. Every other intern seems to have somebody who our research adviser brought in to help them out specifically - e.g a intern doing Latin music has a musicology grad student to advise them , a intern doing migration patterns in Latin America has a sociology research associate to advise them, etc.

What should I do to stay with the institute? I really like what they are doing, and they seem to like the research that I'm doing, and do tend to hire people that are beneficial to them after they graduate college. SO how can I make sure to not only keep that up, but to possibly be employed by them post-grad?

Also, what should I be doing in my research in order to complete it successfully?

If you're a freshman doing research in your first year, and your professor has mostly left you to your own devices, then I think it's reasonable to assume that:

The main benefits of this research will be the experience you gain
There is a high chance that what you are doing will not result in publishable work, and that is okay

The most important thing is to communicate with your advisor. If you are unsure of what to do, then relay that to your advisor.

They will not look down on you for asking for direction or expressing confusion, and if they do, it is their fault for hiring a freshman to work in a brand new research area. Helping you out in areas like this is precisely why you have an advisor.

  what is expected of me

That you do what you're told to do, communicate when you're confused, and when they give you freedom, give it your best effort.

Do not flounder for weeks on end without asking for help!

  How can I bring up issues to my adviser?

I like email, because it lets you gather your thoughts and think about what you're saying. Your professor will likely either respond by email, and either set up a meeting, or give you some advice for email.

Tell them you're unclear on what exactly how to do, and you'd like to ask if they have specific expectations, or if you're free to try things on your own.

Be honest, but be brief. Professors are busy, and if you get to the point, they will take it much better than if you waste their time dancing around what you're trying to say.

  How do I stay with the institute

Honestly, in my experience, starting with a group is the easiest way to stay with them. Work hard, communicate well. If they see potential in you, they will likely want to keep you.

And, be honest! If you like working there, say it. Professors like students they know and trust when recruiting for post-grad studies,
and often your undergrad projects can lead into your graduate work.

  what should I be doing in my research in order to complete it successfully?

This is a very complicated question. Communicating will help. Try to manage risk: try out ideas on a small scale before you devote your time to them. And, you will read a lot. Knowing what has already been done will guide what you do, as well as ensuring you're not accidentally duplicating someone's research.


My advisor used my research idea and wrote a paper with another student, what should I do? I had an idea of using a specific type of data in a specific research area (sorry, I realize this sounds vague). No one has used this type of data in this area before. I shared the idea with my advisor. Recently I noticed the advisor and another student published a paper based on my idea. I think it is not fair. What do I do?

Edit: Thank you all for the comments and answers.
To clarify a couple of things: it wasn't just a fleeting conversation or group brainstorming. I came up with the idea myself, did initial work, and shared it with the advisor. I would expect to be at least told they wanted to work on this even if they were to conduct an independent analysis. I do not think the time frame and other factors would allow forgetting where the idea came from. The group works on several topics and my idea was more like a side line project. There is a lot of publications coming from these main topics, so it's not like this specific paper would be crucial for future funding.
I think the worst in the whole situation is that now I distrust my advisor.

It's not clear whether you are still in the same research group. I suspect not, or you would have been aware that another person in the group was doing the work and paper. While it is morally questionable to use someone else's idea without asking them to be involved, there's nothing you can do in the sense of 'getting it fixed'.

But it may be worthwhile sending an email that is not accusing. The adviser may have felt that you were fully occupied, or that the project was too easy for you but was a good training project for a student, or simply forgotten about the conversation or any number of other reasons. An email like:

Dear Prof X - I saw your recent paper Y. As you may remember from our discussion (approximate time frame), I am interested in this idea and the paper looks very similar to what we discussed. I am disappointed not to be involved in the implementation so far and would like to participate in any future work coming out of this paper.


Should I mention personal information in this thank you letter? So I got an email from my university that a donor is willing to provide me with a scholarship to help me finish my program. I don't know him and I never met him before.

I mentioned these points in my thank you letter:

Introduction:

Purpose of the letter / Thank you
Informing about the university and that I received the scholarship

Paragraph 1:

How would the scholarship reflect on my education
Appreciation
Willing to do better

Paragraph 2:

Introducing my major and all the projects that I accomplished so far.
Excitement
Thank you

Last paragraph:

Thank you

This might sound weird but am I missing personal information? Is it usually supposed to introduce yourself and maybe your contact information in a thank you letter?

I want it to be professional but I never done this before and excuse me this is my first time here

If I received a donor personally choosing to fund my education, I would include personal information in the thank you letter. The personal information I would include are things like "I grew up in .... I became interested in [scientific field] because..." and I would include it in the first paragraph. The reason that I feel that including personal information is appropriate is because you were personally chosen for this funding source (as opposed to applying to a scholarship committee, for example). Congrats!


Search for authors on Google Scholar by their field of study and country On Google Scholar, you can do an author search based on keywords. For example, if I find an author who has "Robotics" as a keyword, and I click on that keyword, it lists all the authors with that keyword, in order of the number of citations.

What I would like to do, is see that same list, but:

1) Only for authors in my country

And:

2) By combining it with another keyword, e.g. all the authors who have "Robotics" and "Machine Learning".

Is this kind of advanced author search possible?

You can search multiple keywords with something like this:

label:robotics + label:machine_learning

in the author search. Narrowing by country can be trickier. You can potentially narrow by the email address. For example, if their profile is verified with a UK email address it will end in .ac.uk. Thus you can search:

label:robotics + label:machine_learning + .ac.uk

and only get UK researchers. You'll probably get some false positives and negatives with this technique so it's not perfect but will help narrow the scope.

Here's a related question pertaining to narrowing country on Google Scholar:

Google Scholar: how to exclude some countries from the search?


Is it better to list a non academic reference that knows me really well, or an academic reference that is less familiar with my work? During university I had 3 professors I did close work with and that were really familiar with my work. Unfortunately one of them retired and as such is no longer willing to give me a reference letter.

I have been working in my field at a startup, and the CTO of the startup knows my work really well and is willing to write a recommendation letter for me.

Is it better to contact professors that remember who I am but with whom I only took a couple of courses and as such may not be totally familiar with my work ethic/skills, or is it better to list my CTO who doesn't have a PhD.

Edit: Field of study is Computer Science

General Answer

This will in part depend on what type of graduate program you are looking at.

If this is for professional school (business, law, medicine, etc.), I would think that a letter of recommendation from non-faculty would be relatively common. Such a letter (such as in the case of an MBA program) could actually be favored over a letter from a pure academic.

Conversely, let's even suppose you are trying to get into a master's program in a purely academic discipline. (For sake of argument, let's say pure maths). You need to have some letters that can speak to your academics and scholastic abilities directly.

However....

If you already have two solid letters from professors who can speak to your academic qualities, a letter from someone in "industry" who can speak to the more non-academic aspects of your profile might add a positive depth to your application that would not be achieved by having three academic references.

Speaking for myself personally, if I was to receive an application from a student who had two academic references and one reference from a CTO, I would likely be more inclined to look at the application with deeper consideration. The non-academic reference could provide a dimension of insight into the applicant that would not be accomplished with three academic references.

Long story short, I would much prefer to have a non-academic letter of recommendation that gives a fuller and more complete picture of an applicant than a letter of recommendation from a professor than does not know a student well.

Situation Specific

Based on some inferred information from your profile, it seems that you are likely trying to get into a program in the computer science fields. If you have a quality letter of recommendation from a well credentialed CTO (i.e. not someone who runs a company worth US$200 from their mother's basement), I would by all means include it in your application. Many programs want students who have connections to industry. It helps them make inroads with their alumni network into new employers and new fields of collaboration.


IEEE and ACM gives very different results Me and my colleague are conducting a literature search that will be used to argue about an experiment. We've just started our SLR and noticed that ACM and IEEE gives very different results.

When searching for "java AND jax+rs", ACM gives 26 hits while IEEE gives 18577 hits when searching for "java AND jax+rs". The term "java AND jersey" gives 25 hits at ACM and 701 hits at IEEE. In other searches, such as "auth AND oauth*", ACM gives 62 hits while IEEE gives 65 hits.

We are using the same filters in both searches (limit to journals and proceedings, all years, metadata only). When searching at ACM we limit the publisher to ACM only, and at IEEE we limit publisher to IEEE.

Are these types of results usual? I understand that they are different publishers and thus publishes different papers but these results seem off.

Big data systems like search engines are really complicated algorithmic engines that put everything through a giant sausage-making apparatus to give you your results.  Even if the two databases are running the exact same engine on their back-end, there is no reason to expect that they have configured it the same way or that the results are necessarily stable.  This is especially true for recent "smart" search engines which try to figure out what you might have wanted, in addition to what you actually entered, and which may broaden your search for you whether you ask them to or not.

In short: every big database search is likely to have its own quirks and ways of approaching queries, and it is reasonable to expect that they may be interpreting what you are asking in radically different ways.


Reapplying to same PhD program after one year, should I state I applied the previous year? I was wondering if someone who is reapplying to the same program after it was not accepted the previous year is seen as a negative thing.

If in the application form I am asked if I applied the program in the past, should I state that I did or would that look bad on my application?

Why is this question been asked? And does not really matter what my answer is? The university clearly states that all application material is destroyed after a few months. Thus the admission commitee look at this question?

Lying on an application form is a really bad idea, it would probably destroy any chance you could have to be accepted. So, if the question is asked, you probably should answer truthfully.

As for why it is asked, it also depends on how a program works. If it's a very competitive program, maybe your application was good, but there were just better candidates than you. In that case, it could be worth applying again. If, on the other hand, the committee just decided that your application was not good enough, then applying again is risky. In any case, you would have to demonstrate that you have significantly improved your application during the last year.


Should you revise a manuscript when only two of the three reviewers provide a positive review? The title is a bit vague by design. What I was actually wondering is, what happens if 1 out of 3 reviewers decides that the paper should not be accepted, but the other 2 reviewers find it interesting and suggest for it to be accepted? Must all 3 reviewers suggest that it is accepted or is that up to the editor? What is the most common outcome in situation like this?

I'm stuck in this situation now - all 3 reviewers suggested some changes; while 2 were quite optimistic and also said that my work is interesting, the third one was really against it and suggested that we rewrite article anew, thus semi-rejected it; the reviewer really seems determined that our paper should not be accepted. Now, if I waste 2 months applying the changes and then wait another 3 for a review only to find out that the third reviewer still thinks it should be rejected, I've wasted almost half a year on nothing. The alternative is to resend the article to some other journal.

Any kind of feedback will be appreciated.

To add to the other answer that has been posted so far (from @mgbdog), I will add something from the perspective of a past editor in chief and frequent associate editor, in the field of computer science.

Generally (look at the various posts about journal workflows) the reviewers provide their feedback, an associate editor recommends, and then the editor in chief either accepts that recommendation or pushes back in some fashion.  So the comment about the editor wanting to proceed is accurate in the aggregate but it really refers to multiple people as a rule.

But the key here is that when one reviewer recommends rejection, and other reviewers were more positive, I assume that the OP received a "major" revision that means it will be returned to the reviewers.  Two already liked it so probably will be in favor of the revision.  The one who didn't, if they were negative enough, may actually not be willing to review it again (after all, the editors didn't listen to them).  I have encountered that several times as an associate editor.  If they do review it again, hopefully they are professional about it and read it with an open mind, and you get your opportunity to improve the paper and respond to their criticism.  So hopefully they are convinced to accept.

If they don't, there is indeed a chance the paper will be rejected after revision.  Just because the editor said to give you a chance to fix it doesn't mean in the end it is fixable.  I once did a journal article that got back extensive comments and a very specific warning from the associate editor that we should not assume that the major revision we were doing actually would result in acceptance. We must have worked on it for another year and with a second minor revision after that, but it got in.

But just because it may be rejected doesn't mean you shouldn't try.  With 2/3 favorable, you seem well positioned, as long as you believe you can either fix what #3 complained about or make an argument in your response that they have it wrong.


Pre-tenure strategies to spend less time on bureaucracy, and more on research In the past year, as faculty, I have spent 33% of my time on paperwork and bureaucratic activities. This does not include service (committees,department meetings, etc), and is after hiring a full time laboratory manager! It is simply the filling out of forms, arguing to retain and expand my space, a wide variety of mandatory training, and being asked to justify and verify a wide variety of things.

I would like to spend less time interacting with the vast number of middle management at my school, and focus on what I enjoy: research and teaching.  However, there always seems to be another 'mandatory' thing.  I do not have tenure, so I cannot yet simply tell them to go away. Any suggestions on how to spend less time on bureaucracy?

Learn to say "NO" (especially to people that do not decide about your tenure)

It is discussed in length here and here but these are my favourite points:

Short and simple answers like "Thanks for coming to me but I’m afraid
it’s not convenient/possible right now" or "I’m sorry but I can’t help with this (at the moment)". Don't start to write endless time-eating apologies.
Avoid feeling guilty about saying "no".
Interrupt the "yes"-cycle using phrases like "I'll get back to you" -
you might not hear from them again if it was not that important after all (which is the case for very many things). My ex-boss did this on a master level: we would only answer requests from people lower in the food chain if the requests were already reminders - the original request was ignored straight away. (I personally think that this is a bit over the top but it worked for him (post-tenure)).


What does EE processing in peer review process mean? I sent a technical paper for peer review at Manuscript Central and after 5 days the status is Awaiting EE Processing. What does this mean?

Check out the canonical question, What does the typical workflow of a journal look like? Since EE is probably executive editor (per Nate Eldredge), that means your paper has passed the initial check. An editor has also been assigned. The next stage is editorial assessment:

  The editors decide whether the paper should enter the review process or should be rejected directly, e.g., because it does not fit the journal’s scope or requirements on importance or quality. A rejection at this (or the previous) stage is called desk reject. The paper may also be returned to the authors for reasons other than rejection, such as to request more data or clearer figures prior to formal review.

That's the stage your paper is likely at.


Where can I find free drawings or artwork to use for an article? These days I see more and more nice pictures in articles, particularly in reviews or articles covering global patterns.

I want to insert a nice drawing of a forest for example, to show ecological processes between different parts of the ecosystem. I don't have money to pay for an artist. Are there some websites with free drawings or clip art, etc., that might fit scientific publishing?

I have looked on deviantart for a while and google but couldn't find anything that fits and that is copyright free.

EDIT: specifically I am not looking for photos but more cartoon kind of art

I want to insert a nice drawing of a forest for example, to show
  ecological processes between different parts of the ecosystem.

If this is the level of complexity you're looking at, I'd say it is best handled by an illustrator. First, it'd be hard to find a set of cliparts that feature ecological processes; and if you put a bunch of cliparts with different styles together it's going to look like an 8th grade science poster project. (Which is fine if that's the level you are happy with.)

I know that you said you don't have money, but have you checked out some alternative way to hire artists? There are artists that draw a logo for a couple hundred thousands dollars, and there are many more artists who charge much, must less than that. One possible place to look is the Hungry Artist sub-Reddit. And here what the local community consider a "good and clear" posting. You can also mention to the artist that it's likely to be featured in a publication, which can help them strengthen their portfolio.

  I have looked on deviantart for a while and google but couldn't find
  anything that fits and that is copyright free.

I'd suggest by all means e-mail the owners of the work you like and see what would be the process of using their work.

And lastly, have you considered drawing them yourself? Free software like Inkscape can do a lot of amazing things. Ecological drawings are also very suitable for a particular style known as isometric projection. They can be drawn using modules and you can paste a single module to form a landscape... the process is quite fun.

Even you're not planning to become a self-trained illustrator, It'd still be good to get familiar with a graphical software. Let's say if you have a background and a set of cliparts from different sources, sometimes little tricks can make them more artistically coherent. For example, unify the hue of the cliparts (e.g. turn them to sepia), passing through the same filter (e.g. through pen sketch filter), or frame them uniformly before placing them on the big forest (e.g. frame them all in circles) may help improve the quality of the art work.

Sorry, I know this is not what you're asking for. I feel that it may be nice to think outside the frame of the constraints once a while.


Are undergraduate courses grades matter, if one change major in graduate schools? Suppose a physics undergraduate student wants to change their major to pure/applied mathematics in graduate school.

The student has already taken few courses in mathematics (suppose Introduction to Complex Analysis, Introduction to Real Analysis, Probability Theory, Advanced Partial Differential Equations) and is doing fine but no A's grades, only B's and B-'s grades, for the mathematics courses and at overall (for every physics and mathematics courses that already taken), the student has upper second class grade (3.3-3.6 grades from 4).

How does the graduate school see this student, given the student really shows interest in mathematics and has at least one publication or attended a pure/applied mathematics conference once as presenter?

If you haven't taken any pure math courses, you are very unlikely to be accepted into graduate school in pure mathematics. How can you prove to the school that you know the stuff they expect incoming graduate students to know? (The first courses in real analysis and abstract algebra, at an absolute minimum.)

If you have taken pure math courses, then you will have grades in these pure math courses, and these will be taken into account by the admissions committees.

If you have A's in your pure math courses and B's in your physics courses, then likely the admissions committee would weight the grades in your math courses more heavily.


ask PI for more acknowledgement of good work / affirmation Setting: PhD student (5th year) at a US research university. Non-native English speaker.

We have a great boss, however sometimes it seems that good things are not being highlighted enough. For example, recently we have published two papers, and it was barely acknowledged. One of the papers was first for the grad student and another took 6 years to publish (i.e. significant achievements).

I think that our whole lab would benefit from more affirmation of good work and good effort that is being made. On the surface, publications, grants awarded, maybe even papers drafted, should be celebrated and highlighted publicly. Same goes for extracurricular activities around the lab (there are few people who contribute significantly to upkeep of lab). I would like to see our lab's work improved, it is not just personal feeling of indignation (which there is a bit :-) As far as I know, positive reinforcement of good behaviors is a proven method of making things better.

How can I bring this up with my professor, or at least express that I wish to see that change?

My take would be somewhat direct:

  I thought that we should celebrate more the achievements around the lab. We talked often about publishing more, so maybe we need to highlight efforts better. It would be especially great to hear from you more often when we do good work.

PS: As I am not native English speaker, I also would like to use some precise language. I have talked to senior colleague, who agreed with my assessment, but haven't given advice on addressing the issue.

PPS: migrated from Workplace@SE based on comments there

This sounds like a matter you may need to take into your own hands. You can't make a person more emotive, affectionate, cheerleader-eque...that may just not be your prof's style. Also, you're sort of asking them to do more "work", even if you don't see it as work. It's one more thing they have to deal with. Why not solve this yourself: be the change you want.

Do you have a pin-board in/near the lab? Cover it in bright paper, call it the achievement board, and start tacking announcements of jobs well done. Alternatively, create an news/achievements email that goes out to everyone once a month that highlights what everyone has accomplished and make sure everyone tells you what they're up to.

Just two of many possibilities, but this way you come across as proactive to your prof, a champion of your peers, rather than needy and demanding of more of their time.


Is it necessary to have only recommendations from Computer Science professors for an application to Computer Science grad program? Can I also have my finance/economics professor recommend me? I have a good relationship with her. Would it matter if she isn't from the CS department in my college?

Yes, absolutely.  Your references should be people who know you, your work and your capabilities best and can give the admissions committee the best possible insight into what to expect from you.  That matters a lot more than what department they're in.  For that matter, they don't even have to be former instructors.  You might also turn to a former supervisor at an internship you did one summer if the work you did for them was especially impressive.


Work with a professor from non-PhD-granting university in the US to earn PhD? I'm new on this website and am not sure how much of higher academia works.

Suppose I wanted to work with a professor in a particular field of mathematics at a research university (not necessarily a PhD-granting university) to possibly write a dissertation in that field. Must that university be a PhD-granting university? If not, how would I go about working in a particular field?

I'm currently working on a master's degree in mathematics. I have found that most of the researchers in the field I would like to pursue are employed at non-PhD-granting universities. Does that mean I won't get the chance to pursue research in the field?

AFAIK, almost every Ph.D. granting universities requires your supervisor to be employed at that university. The only workaround for your situation is to have your desired professors from other universities as your co-supervisor or co-advisor. Please note that this is something to be decided by your supervisor, not by you. Also, you need to convince a professor from another field to accept your not-related application in the first place.


Is it okay to ask a coworker/supervisor to give a talk? I'm a staff scientist in a medium-sized lab and I'm organizing a large event for high school students at my university, a large public research institution. I'd like to invite a professor or senior researcher to give a talk at the event.

Is it generally considered okay to invite your close collaborators (e.g. PI, direct supervisors) to give a talk?

I have no misconceptions about the importance of my event (it's not) but I don't want to violate some etiquette by asking someone in my lab to give a talk. What about other events, small conferences, etc.?

Yes, I think it's perfectly acceptable that you invite colleagues to give a talk at an event or conference.

There are many advantages for them if they give such a talk, for example:

disseminating their work
practising speaking to a non-expert audience
networking
free coffee/ lunch/ biscuits

If they don't want to do it, they'll decline your invitation and you can ask someone else-- a good choice might be PhD students who will actively want or need to practice outreach and public engagement.

Anyway, whoever you decide to invite, I don't think you've got anything to lose by asking.


Can instructors fail honest students when tests are too hard because most students are cheating? I am in Nursing school.  I can prove that 80-90% of students have cheated every semester.  They pass test banks around in email, text or Instant Messenger.  Every semester I've come forward (5 instructors) but nothing major has happened.  In 3 semesters of nursing school the faculty has never condemned nor said a word about using test banks.  This semester I tried to warn instructors before the first exam, but they didn't listen.  Now a few of us simply can't pass the exam because we're not cheating.  The exams are that hard.

Test banks from previous semesters were being passed down from the semester ahead of us.  I looked back at these test banks after the exam and found 21 questions just in one chapter.  That's when I emailed them the test banks that were being passed around.  It's a fine example of how academic dishonesty cheats everyone including the ones being honest.

Every semester Instructor makes the exams harder and harder because "statistically" the instructor data shows statistically "These are good/not too hard questions".  But I have the documentation to show WHY people are able to pass.  Had I used these test banks I would be passing.  Honesty is earning a few of us a 60.00% on each exam.

What can I do?  I warned them; they didn't listen. I plan on filing a complaint and a grade grievance.  My question is: can an instructor fail students who are being honest?  When there is clear proof of compromised exams and academic dishonesty throughout the class. Is it our fault they can't catch it?  Is it our fault they have no idea what a hard question really is? Can instructors really fail people for being honest and choosing not participate?

I agree that the policy seems to be that using previous years' tests to study is allowed. However, if this is the case, the faculty should say something and make sure that all students have equal access to previous tests. The fact that some students are unaware that using previous tests to study is permitted is a problem, as is the unequal distribution of tests. I could easily see a student who was marginalized from the group for some reason (sex, race, nationality, etc) not getting these unofficial emails, and then it would be an issue of discrimination.

I would recommend the faculty post the previous year's tests to the website to make sure everyone has equal access and is aware that these are permitted study aids.

As a student, I would push for a clear statement in class on whether or not these aids were permitted. If faculty refuse to make a statement or take any action I would recommend speaking to your academic advisor about the issue.


Professor wants to use required class project for research In one of my required undergraduate courses, my professor has given a mandatory assignment. He has indicated that he will use our code from the assignment for his research. He has not mentioned attributing it, nor asked our permission to use the code.

I'm not opposed to him using the code for his research, but I want to guarantee that if he does, I will be attributed. Is there a good way to go about this? Furthermore, is it acceptable for a professor to use student code from required class projects for research?

(there was a similar question here but did not apply, since it dealt with commercial uses, and another here but did not include the fact that the course was required for the major.)

There may be course policies or institution policies allowing it at your school, but you should be at least cited/credited/acknowledged in that professor's research.

I've personally had my research and work used in a professors publications and she has always at least acknowledged me in her publications.

(My case may differ from yours, in that the research I was involved in was done on a student-employee basis. I'm not sure how that might change the dynamic.)

I would certainly at least send an email so that there is some sort of recoverable proof, asking if your work will be cited/attributed to yourself. Don't fall victim to the old "your reward is the experience" thing. While valid and applicable in some situations, not so when it's your intellectual property.


Dress code for Thesis Discussion Is there something like a "standard dress code" for a Ph.D thesis discussion? And, if there is - how important is it? Obviously, one should not (I think) dress too casually, but I do not know what is deemed appropriate.

I don't know how much this varies around the world; if it helps, I am from Europe.

In my experience, different professors can have very different feelings about this. If you have any doubt, best to ask your primary adviser.


As a co-author, should I add someone who provided access to high-performance computing facilities and engineering technical support as another author? I have two questions, a general question and a particular case question, regarding the authors of a manuscript.

In general, I would like to inquire about who should be added as authors to a manuscript as well as about the order of the authors.
I prepared a research paper and I was wondering whether I should add the name of this person or not. In particular, this person presented me with an access to his computer facilities (high-performance computers) and he has been supporting me with his engineering technical support. However, he is neither a researcher nor a person holding a PhD degree. In fact, he is an engineer and he is doing this for free. Can I put his name as a co-author to our manuscript?

Authorship conventions vary enormously from field to field, so it is impossible to answer this question in any generality. This is the sort of question you need an advisor for.

However, two general pieces of advice are to (i) make sure to discuss authorship at the earliest opportunity so as to avoid conflict later on and (ii) be generous, particularly with junior people (e.g., non-PhDs). People tend to worry about dividing the credit for the work, but, in reality, adding another author does not deprive you of much credit; a much greater risk is offending someone and harming future collaboration opportunities.


Is a Master's degree in Europe valid for a teaching career in the USA? I'm currently an undergraduate student in the US but looking seriously into some master's programs at European universities for the international experience, cost difference in my field, and exposure to different styles of study. I'd also like to become a high school teacher someday at a public or private school, most probably in the United States.

I understand that each state has license requirements for public school teachers, but as far as where they get their higher degree, would it be disqualifying if the graduate university is outside the US? Does the type of accreditation matter (like if it is accredited in the US, or by the government of the country in which it is located, or another authority)?

For context, the universities I'm looking at are in EU countries and the UK and middle-to-well-ranked.

EDIT: For clarification, I am a US citizen by birth and will earn Bachelor's degrees in the US. And as far as why I mentioned I'm looking into US schools, I would totally be open to pursuing a career abroad but I know attaining second citizenship can be difficult and I have know idea what job markets are like abroad... the US just seemed like the more realistic option.

The short answer is that your EU Master's degree would typically be about as useful as a US Master's degree in your subject area, which is not very helpful by itself.

Most of the requirements to be licensed as a teacher in most states in the US have more to do with what training you've had in education rather than your subject matter expertise.

A further important point is that if you aren't already a US citizen and unless you can immigrate to the US through some other pathway (e.g. by being married to a US citizen) you'll find that it is difficult if not impossible to get work authorization to teach in a school in the US.


Is it possible to order individual academic journals? Is it possible to order a physical copy of an academic journal? If I were published and wanted a copy of that Issue to keep, could I buy a physical copy? The journal that I might be published in is Journal of Vacuum Science and Technology A, which is an AIP journal.

Some journals are on-line only and some are both on-line and print, and a few still print only. Since journals generally want to keep costs down and the printing process takes quite a lot including postage the trend is for all journals to drop print. Left is the possibility of print-on-demand but I am not sure this will be a possibility. I have yet to see any on-line journals offer such printing.

So while that was the general picture, in your case, you need to contact the journal. If they print copies, they should be able to sell you one. But, such a request should best be made when you provide your final manuscript of proofs, not long after the fact, the reason being that no-one sits on stocks of printed journals, they minimize the number of prints produced.

So: contact the editor and ask is the simple answer.


How to write a decent report introduction on work you have created? I'm finding it quite difficult to start off a report I have to write. So to write a report you will probably know that you are not allowed to write in first person. But the problem I'm having is writing an introduction not in first person, as the report is to be on the topic on two websites that I have created, one using web standards, and one with a content management system.

I just can't figure out what to point out in the introduction, as there isn't a problem involved, it doesn't really cover a specific question, it's just two websites I have made, that's it.

I don't really know how to explain my problem very well, but hopefully you will understand what I mean, thanks for the help.

First and foremost, despite the conventional wisdom to the contrary, it's actually often entirely acceptable to write technical documents in the first person.  Unless you are specifically required to avoid it, it's OK.  Furthermore, even if you can't keep it, you can always start by writing in first person, and then transform to passive voice later.

From there, a good general skeleton of an introduction is sort of a "cone" funneling a reader towards more specific information:

What is the context for the work that you have done?
What was the goal for the work?
What exactly did you accomplish, and how can it be quantified and verified?
What are the implications of this work?

Finally, if a piece of work is genuinely simple, it's OK if the introduction is quite short.  I have written some reports whose introduction went on for many pages, and others that were a single paragraph, depending on what needed to be explained and in what detail.


How to cite my earlier paper which is submitted to the same conference? I actually wrote two papers on my work, and I want to publish both in same conference. I have now submitted first paper and it is yet to be selected and my second paper is extension of my first paper. I want to publish the second one also. So can anyone please tell me how to cite my first paper? Both are IEEE papers.

One solution would be to post one or both papers to the arXiv, and then cite the arXiv versions.

IEEE does allow posting to the arXiv with certain terms. From their FAQ:

  Can an author post his manuscript on a preprint server such as ArXiv?

  Yes. The IEEE recognizes that many authors share their unpublished manuscripts on public sites. Once manuscripts have been accepted for publication by IEEE, an author is required to post an IEEE copyright notice on his preprint. Upon publication, the author must replace the preprint with either 1) the full citation to the IEEE work with Digital Object Identifiers (DOI) or a link to the paper’s abstract in IEEE Xplore, or 2) the accepted version only (not the IEEE-published version), including the IEEE copyright notice and full citation, with a link to the final, published paper in IEEE Xplore.


How to follow up on the status of the official offer letter About 5 weeks ago, I decided to accept a TT assistant professor position at a R1 University in US, and was told to wait for 1-2 weeks for an official (electronic) letter arriving since it would go through the internal HR processes before being ready for signing. At this moment, I have not received further updates about the letter. I think the process may take more time than expected because of the Covid-19. But is it appropriate to send out a follow-up email? Or just watch for their notice? If the letter has no harm, any suggestions to draft one? Many thanks in advance.

You can probably safely wait a bit longer for the reasons you suggest. The staff that normally handles such things may not have complete access to their office systems and may be poorly supported for distance work.
There is some turmoil generally in hiring now and if the university is part of a State system they will be bound by directives from the legislature. But there is nothing you can do to affect that in any case.
So don't wait more than another week and ask for an update. Just note that you don't have the official notice yet and would like an update.
If you have other offers pending with deadlines don't wait too close to those deadlines to ask for the update. I don't expect bad things to happen, but it is hard to make predictions in times of chaos.
And congratulations.


Next steps in approaching an unresponsive academic I am applying for PhD programmes very soon and I have recently been trying to get in touch with my potential referees. At my previous institution there is a professor who knows me the most out of all academics I know; we had plenty of conversations regarding the field I want to pursue my PhD in and also I did very well in modules taught by him. I was planning to request a reference from him and I tried to get in touch with him three times (through e-mail), however, he has not replied to me (it has been about two months since my first e-mail). Should I assume that he overlooked my e-mails (he is very busy) and send him another message? Or rather, should I try to contact him through the Department? It might seem to be a trivial case, but I really do not want to annoy him too much as his reference would potentially be of the biggest importance in my applications. What would you suggest in this particular case?

I had a similar experience with a professor while working off an Incomplete.  He did a lot of outside consulting on top of his academic obligations and was one of those people who is simply hard to contact.

In the event that your professor is simply hard to contact I would track down a phone number and try a direct call.  It is possible that your emails got lost in the shuffle or the spam filter.

Alternatively their situation may have changed since you were there: they could be on sabbatical, sick or they may have left the institution.  Do you have any friends still there you could check with? You could also check the course listings to see if they are currently teaching.

Without knowing the professor I think it is unlikely they are trying to duck your request.  If they didn't want to recommend you, there are other ways to handle that such as with a weak recommendation or simply telling you.

I would try to exhaust the other contact options before officially trying to contact them through the department.

Does your new potential school have a portal for recommendation letters?  I know several schools that request the recommendation directly from individuals you specify.


Do research laboratories hire international students with a Bachelor's Degree? I intend to increase my research experience in a field not very closely related to mine (I am a chemical engineer and want to pursue Tissue Engineering). I a currently a 4th year undergraduate. I have some research experience in the field. Do I have a shot a securing a research job in a european or american research Lab or a University?

I am not sure you can call it a job, but if somehow you put it nicely as a internship, or unpaid internship, you might be lucky enough to find someone that would like to invest some time on you.

Keep in mind that apart from your will, there must be some supervisor that would be willing to guide you along the process. For that to happen, either there must a be an open position, or you have to convince them that you are worth it.

One thing you could do is not to as for income, since you mention your main goal is to upgrade research experience. If you need income at any case, then you can as for student-job positions which are common in Europe (especially in Germany). But, still the Professor will need to spend some of his funds on you.

Prepare a good motivation letter to convince the Professor, get quality recommendation letters, show some proof that you have the potential to conduct research "independently" (if you have some publications in the field that would help you), make sure you find a research group that fits you (more precisely you fit them, in the sense that you know the field they are working on, you know the tools they use for the specific research)

But since you are a Bachelor student, and I assume you don't have much to offer you should keep your demands as low as possible. Alternately, check if your university has cooperation with other universities, maybe you can go to a university that could fit you as an exchange student?!


What are academic honors and prizes? I am applying for a scholarship (women in graduate studies). It asks whether I have received any academic honors and prizes. I received a couple of master's awards from my supervisor's grant and a graduate scholarship. Do those count as an academic honor or not?

And in another part, it asks whether I have got funding in the past or present. I am getting some money for doing research. Is it a bad thing to include? They won't give me further funding? Having said that, the amount of money that I am getting for doing research is nominal, that is why I am applying for more funding.

I dont see why your graduate scholarship and masters award are not the honor or funding. I have used them in my CV for PhD applications, and plan to to include for my post-docs as well.

About funding: if you have received funding from any source, do mention it. It will not hurt your chances. In fact, it will demonstrate that you are a dependable researcher. Do mention about the project detail (if you can) and that you have successfully completed the project. When they ask about funding, it does not mean that they are not willing to give it to you. They are looking for someone who know the worth of the money he/she will get.


Should I change thesis topic? I'm a student in the technical field A in a European university. I'm currently doing a master thesis in a field that's notoriously at the interface of subjects A and B, I haven't officially started the thesis time yet, but I've been doing preliminary work for about a month and a half and there is verbal agreement with my supervisor that I'm doing it.

The more I delve into the thesis and the more I realize that, while being at the interface, the topic is mostly subject B, with very little subject A.
While I don't hate subject B, I've come to realize that I'm not really interested in it, and I'm finding working on this thesis rather demotivating.

I still could technically leave the thesis, although I suspect it won't make me look good in the eyes of my supervisor, since I already told them that I intended to go through with it and I've had multiple occasions to leave by now.

On the one hand, I still like other aspects of the interface between A and B, doing A with a B perspective instead of the other way around (which I'm doing right now) is still a possibility for me, hence I don't think it would be wise to break ties with my supervisor and their group. I feel that if I leave the thesis I'm just going to look bad, lose potential references and just restrict my possibilities for the future. The group is quite important in the subject and the master thesis admission process is pretty selective, and I don't have any other readily available alternatives. From this perspective, it seems better to soldier through this thesis and do it well in order to have good references. I've been told that it's not at all uncommon to do a PhD in a different subfield than your master thesis. And who knows, maybe interesting elements of subject A (or even B) might come up along the way, though that seems unlikely to me right now.

On the other hand, I fear that committing to a thesis in a subject I'm not passionate about will prevent me from doing a good job. I fear that I'll just survive through it doing the bare minimum and end up with a mediocre thesis and mediocre references in a subject I don't really enjoy, making it much more difficult to both stay in this subject or switch. Beginning a thesis I do not enjoy, while I have still time to leave, feels somehow like lying to my supervisor, and starting a project alreading looking forward to end it is not a good looking prospect.
Even if I do manage to write a good thesis, I fear its strong element of subject B will make it more difficult for me to be considered for subject A positions.
Also I would like to stay at the same university after my Master's, and I think the chances of that would be made better by doing a thesis on a subject I like, which could be continued in a PhD.

I guess I'm demotivated and looking for advice from experienced researchers on what of the concerns I listed are sound, and what, if any, am I exaggerating.

This is certainly a question you need to explore with your supervisor. What they would accept or recommend is certainly important.

What an experienced researcher would do is one of the following, maybe both. First, they would be likely to consult with colleagues (not unlike your supervisor) and explore viable alternatives.

But, assuming that they have a secure appointment, such as tenure, they would do whatever most appealed to them. Of course, wisdom would suggest they keep their options open.

But you don't have the luxury of a secure appointment. Your supervisor's advice is needed and should probably be followed. They will also have advice on the probably effect on your career, if any.

Actually, I think you may be suffering from a common ailment: Buyer's Remorse. For most such situations, the feeling of regret goes away in time. If you are making progress toward a better future, you are probably doing the right thing. Don't let emotions get in the way of progress (easy to say, of course).


Is obtaining a MS degree in Chemistry useful to strengthen your CV if you wish to apply to a top PhD program in Chemistry? I got admitted to a small MS program in the US with an assistantship and I still have not decided if I should accept the offer or not. The reason is that I want to pursue a PhD and build an academic career in the field of Chemistry. However, I come from a small institution in a developing country with little research, so I cannot just apply to a top graduate program such as Berkeley or Harvard because I would be in serious disadvantage in comparison to the hundreds of other applicants which have publications and vast research experience.
In your opinion, is obtaining a MS degree in an American institution, even though it is in a very small program, something that would improve my chances of being accepted into a decent PhD program in the future?

I could also try those smalls PhD programs in institutions ranked below the top 100 (according to THE or QS) but I heard from a lot of people that a PhD in such an institution would add nothing to your career, since there are many PhDs graduating from top institutions and it is already hard for them to get a job, so your chances of succeeding either in an academic or industrial career would be quite low, and most of them have to find something else to do (work at a home depot, open a clothing shop etc, just kidding).

Short answer is yes, you probably should take it or a position like it if you want a PhD from a top US school. It sounds like you don't have many or any papers as a coauthor and your current school's reputation is unknown. So, getting a Masters from a US school with a good reputation, even though it may be a smaller institution could give your application a boost. Also, you will want to see if you can get an internship during the summer with a major research institution while you're doing it. That will open many more doors than the Masters alone.


Being the last author as an undergrad TA (a PhD student) of one of my classes was looking for an undergrad to join in one of his projects. This was not directly related to the field I want to work in grad school, but there is no group or faculty in my preferred area, so I wanted to join in anyways (because it is another area I enjoy and I had lots of free time). We started working on it with him, had weekly meetings, I helped with theoretical aspects, and I did all implementations (replicating the other papers that did not provide code so we can compare plus our own experiments). I also did a lot about designing the experiments (which is the only way of proving your work in this area).

This got accepted to one of the top conferences. While I obviously didn't expect to be the first author, I was kind of suprised when I saw that I was the last author, and the professor (PhD student's advisor) was the second last author. For context, it is CS (but not theory), and the author list in our paper is clearly not alphabetical. Now, my questions:

Isn't this unusual? I thought it was better for a professor to be the last author? When I asked the PhD student about, he just said it was the professor's decision.
Should I still include this in my PhD applications (it's my only publication so far)? I feel like the admissions committee would ask about why I am the last author.
When asked, should I mention the possible reasons? I never asked the professor, because, after this project, the PhD student left the program and started a PhD program from scratch somewhere else. Since I had mainly worked with him, and since it was not my primary interest area, I decided to not start a new project. (I don't remember if I conveyed this to the professor after the author list was sent or before, it might have had an effect).

Finally, I have checked this professor's Google Scholar page, and in fact he has acted similarly at least 3 times before (3 publications, each with some of his PhD students, in each one, one of the PhD students is the last author). I believe this (and his other PhD student leaving) are supporting facts for me, I still feel like it could come across as whiny

There are at least three basic author order schemes:

1) Alphabetical

2) In decreasing order of contribution

3) Split into junior and senior contributors, with juniors coming first in decreasing order of contribution, and then seniors in increasing order of contribution. [Often with just one senior spot]

In Computer Science, I've predominantly seen 1) and 2). An undergrad being at the end of an author list that is clearly not alphabetically ordered is a dead give-away for order type 2), and hence does not require particularly explanation.


Formal Title for Someone with a Masters Degree? We all know that someone with a doctorate is called a Doctor (or abbreviated as Dr.), is there a formal title for someone with a Masters degree? I've never heard someone refer to a person with a masters as "Master". I've also heard that Esquire is sometimes used as a formal title for someone with a masters, is this correct or is there another title?

In the United States there's no formal pre-nominal title held by individuals holding a Master's degree that I know of, so it's very unlike Dr. Xxxx that one holding a Ph.D., etc. might be addressed. In text, you would address such a person with a post-nominal suffix like M.A., MBA, etc. I'm sure the logic is different among specific types of degree, where Esq. for Esquire is a post-nominal suffix for those in the legal profession in the US. To give you an example, though: If I hold an M.Sc., you might refer to me as "Kendall, M.Sc." if you wanted to address me in an email or letter, but I would realistically expect Mr. Kendall or what have you face-to-face.

I should also add that courtesy titles like Esq. or Mr., and academic titles don't get used at the same time. Kendall, Esq. M.Sc. would be wrong, as would Mr. Kendall, M.Sc.!


As a graduate student, is it better to use a Gmail address or name@mywebsite.com? As a grad student (Note: I am in the humanities, so nobody is really technically inclined), I have an address from my institution (.edu) but I rarely use it. I suppose I do "use" it, but it forwards to my gmail and usually I reply with my gmail address. Almost all of the other grad students, as well as many professors, in my program -- and elsewhere in my field -- do something similar; they don't use their edu addresses, but instead exclusively use gmail. I have been increasingly wary of Google's oversight and have been thinking about switching. But: Considering Gmail's monoculture among academics, is it more "professional" to use a Gmail account, or one that you personally own such as myname@myname.com? Or just weird?

To be clear: This is not about which email address to attach to a publication. That would clearly be my edu address, as it forwards to gmail. This is about what it 'says' about me.

I don't know how people view things in the humanities, but in mathematics having your own domain named after you sounds a little presumptuous, at least to me.  Some people do, and I find this normal for people like  writers or some programmers, but not most types of academics.  In addition, sometimes these go defunct because people stop renewing them, so something like gmail is a more "stable" solution.  If you dislike gmail and don't want to use your institutional address, check out some other email providers (yahoo, zoho, mail.com).

Note: to me, instituional addresses still seem more "professional" than something like gmail, but sufficiently many people use gmail for professional reasons that it doesn't look strange to use it.  In fact, something like gmail is often a better choice for young people who haven't settled down and may change their institutional address several times.


Emailing a student corrections to their typed notes I study undergraduate mathematics at university. In one of my units, the lecturer does not provide any notes (typeset or otherwise), but has said that if anyone else who attends the lectures wants to typeset some notes, he'd be more than happy to check them over and then share them with the class.

Remarkably, one of the students is actually doing that, and is actively typing up notes for the course as it goes on, and those notes are being shared via the online course page with the class.

Unfortunately, the notes have some errors. These are often, rather than just being typos, completely incorrect assertions. I don't blame the student who's writing them at all; I completely understand that having written the notes it's very difficult to then check them over properly.

I want to email the student with a large number of corrections to the notes he's typeset, but I don't want to come across as overly assuming. I feel that emailing the student who's taken the time to make these notes to such an effect might come across as condescending - or worse, "I'm better than you, do it like this". Should I email the lecturer instead? What's an appropriate way to approach this situation without upsetting anyone?

Since the notes are shared via an online system, it seems like a good idea to collect all found errors and typos in the very same online system, e.g. if the system provides a kind of a forum. This would have several benefits:

Everybody who spots an error can report it right away.
Everybody who suspects an error can check if it actually is one.
The author of the notes or the instructor can answer in the forum and indicate if this is an actual error and announce when it has been fixed in the notes.
There is the possibility of discussion around the issues - sometimes one thing appear as an error for one person, but not so for another one and in the end it may just be a matter of convention (this is also true for mathematics…).

Note that the etiquette of the forum is very important: Everybody has to be polite, ask and answer in good faith and no blaming shall happen. But if this is supported by a moderator (e.g. the instructor) this can work very well.

I used a system like this for the lecture notes I typed and I even announced and awarded bonus points for everybody who found an error in the notes (this seemed to be a good idea as it makes it pretty clear that all lecture notes may contain errors…).


Do people compete for self-funded studentship? I know that any admission application is subject to review, but I was thinking that the main competitions and open calls are for funding. If someone has full funding and a reasonable resume can directly apply for PhD programs in top universities (MIT or Oxford). In other words, there is no limit in available spots for applicants if self-funded and a supervisor is interested.

I saw some call for applications: for example. UEA is not a bad university, but not a university everyone wishes to study there, then waiting for call for application. I mean, students check if Oxford has an open fellowship to apply, but if you have funding, why you should wait for UEA to announce that they have free place for PhD students?

Even for self-funded students, universities normally support with TA or RA programs, but here it is mentioned that a bench fee should be paid in addition to normal tuition fee. And it is needed to have a degree with honors to apply.

My question is: do really student compete for a PhD position even when they are self-funded?

Do they receive some applications on such calls for self-funded studentship OR it is just a tricky advertisement?

At most reputable schools, self-funding will not exempt you from the admissions process. At the best schools, admission is often completely independent of funding.