Post-master’s education opportunities? I am about to finish a master’s degree in data science/analytics. (Yes, I realize these are all the rage now, but let’s leave that alone for now.)

I have enjoyed the program and have learned quite a bit. However, I feel that overall the program is a survey of analytics/ML/AI techniques and there was little opportunity to truly dig deep into any of the topics that were covered.

I would like to find a way to continue my formal education and perhaps do some research, or at the least do a much deeper dive, into a more narrow field of study. However, I don't believe that a PhD program is right for me. I'm a father, a husband and a full-time employee. I'm not willing to give all of that up to pursue a PhD. (In retrospect, perhaps a thesis option in the masters program would have been appropriate, but it's too late for that.)

Is there something out there that's between a master's degree and a PhD?

I'm kind of in the same boat - I'm getting an M.S. Analytics but I'm in my first semester instead of my last and I am just so... undecided. Second masters? (edit: multiple advanced degrees is not as uncommon as you'd think) Ph.D? Statistics or Computer Science? On the bright side you shouldn't have any trouble getting good recommendation letters if you want to go the formal route.

I'm eyeballing UT Austin's upcoming online Computer Science M.S. via EdX (estimated 10k tuition total but hasn't launched yet). There's also the pricey but IMO high quality earn-your-way in Harvard Extension School where I'm eyeballing the Software Engineering Masters. A lot of our alumns and even PhD's I know really like coursera.

One strategy I use because I'm poor is scope out the textbooks in use at the programs I want to be in and just read them. It's almost 2019 no one can stop you from learning :)


How do I reference a conference paper that is due to be published later this year I am writing a paper that builds on a previous work. The previous work has been accepted at a conference and will be published as part of the proceedings, but it hasn't been published yet. Do I just reference it using the standard format for referencing unpublished works or not?

Either "Accepted for Intl. Conf. on Whatever, 2018", or
"To appear in Proc. Intl. Conf. on Whatever, 2018", or
"Intl. Conf. on Whatever, 2018, to appear".


How to interest a researcher in a topic (social science)? I have created a thesis related to the objective utility and evaluation of art.  It is based on many years of personal experience in the arts, as well as many years of study into the philosophy of aesthetics.

I believe this thesis could be tested quantitatively by a trained social scientist, and that the results would hold both scientific and commercial interest.

Is there any possibility an academic researcher (either a grad student or a professor) might take on research on a thesis he or she didn't originate?  If so, what would be the best route to connect with that person, and how would the idea need to be presented (and/or what preliminary work would need to be completed first)?

It would be a fairly difficult process.

Firstly, you would need to convince someone that you aren't a crank and are worth listening to. Once they listen to you, you'll have to convince them that your work is of such import that they should stop working on their current projects—you can assume that everyone is at full capacity already, and that adding your project to their task will decrease their involvement elsewhere—to research on your topic. Most academics are academically motivated by the love of their field, the possibility of getting one or more respected publications, and the prospect of getting a grant, not necessarily in that order. You can only appeal to the first two, and likely only the first one. That's not a very strong argument.

You also stated in your opening question "I believe this thesis could be tested quantitatively by a trained social scientist...". The implication here is that you are not such an individual. (I'm not speaking of degrees, I'm simply speaking in terms of experience in performing academic-level research and analytics.) In that case, are you certain your research thus far is valid? Your entire thesis could be based on faulty statistics, poor sampling, a misunderstanding of some fundamental concept, etc.

Long story short, you have an uphill battle ahead of you.


Is it normal for a PhD student to be asked to contribute to a grant proposal? Is it common for a PhD student to be asked to contribute to a grant proposal (one of those that require faculty to submit them, the "big" ones)?

I've been asked to write a small section but I'm really worried that whatever I will write will be used to shoot down the proposal and that if that happens it will be my fault. I have no experience whatsoever writing grant proposals and have only minimal experience writing research (I'm a first year).

This is a big proposal for a multi-million dollar project. I don't want to be the reason for its failure.

You should have no cause for concern. If the grant is related to your work in any way then it is appropriate for you to be involved in the grant writing.

But you aren't going to "shoot it down". In any reasonable case your work will be reviewed by others putting the grant together and also, especially for a large grant, a grants management office at the university. You might be asked to re-write your contribution once or twice with advice from those others.

It will be a good experience for you. If such large grants are an important part of your field, then you will want to learn what goes in to them so that you can lead it yourself later in your career.

You might try to find writing samples from other grants to aid you. The research office or the PI can probably provide some older work. You can also try to work as closely as possible with others on the team. They likely have more experience than you do and can provide some guidance.


Publishing and Self-Archiving Recently I had a paper accepted by a major journal in discrete mathematics. Now the paper is going through the final stages of publication. The publisher sent me a link in which I have to specify the access policy for the paper. I can choose to either pay a fee (which I won't), and make my paper publicly available from the publisher website, or I can choose to self-archive, and
then make my paper publicly available after a period of 24 months of embargo.
More precisely, the text for the self-archiving is the following:

  I wish to self-archive my accepted author manucript , which is my draft
      version of the article and which may include any author-incorporated
      changes from the peer review process. I can post this author manuscript
      on my institutional or subject-orientated repository immediately for
      internal use and make it publicly available after a journal specific
      embargo period has expired.

The problem is that I have already posted the revised version of my paper at arxiv much before receiving this access form from the publisher. So I have some questions concerning this paragraph.

The paragraph says that I can post the manuscript at a subject-oriented repository immediately for internal use. As mentioned before I already posted it to arxiv, which I think can be considered as a subject-oriented repository. Is that allowed? What do they mean by internal use?
What do they mean about making the manuscript publicly available after the embargo? I have a link at my homepage pointing to the arxiv page. Is this considered to be publicly available?
What is the difference between posting it to a repository and making it public?
Can I get in trouble if they find the link to the paper at my homepage?

The text you quote is from Elsevier, and their policy on hosting articles says that "arXiv and RePEc can update a preprint immediately with the accepted manuscript and a DOI link to the formal publication" (while the embargo period applies only to other organizations), so you haven't violated the agreement in updating the arXiv posting.  You can add the DOI via the arXiv's journal reference feature once it is available.


When to offer co-authorship vs asking for feedback I am quite new to this game and I am not sure how to ask people to be co-authors on a paper I have mostly written myself but that I think would get better  with someone else's input. When is a good strategy to offer a coauthorship and when should I simply ask for a feedback on the paper? This is somewhat of a review paper and I feel that it would be important to have some experts from the field. But regardless how should I decide when to offer a coauthorship?

I'd ask for help. If said help turns out relevant, add a footnote thanking for it. If the help is in some way crucial (found and fixed a fatal flaw, suggested a (better) way to compute the results, suggested a relevant extension, ...) ask the helper if they want to be coauthors or just be thanked as above.


How do I publish papers taking a middle ground on a controversial topic, when reviewers with strong opinions on either side keep rejecting them? In the last few years I have been working on a controversial topic A of my field. As usual, I started doing the state-of-the-art and talked with some scientists, and I discovered that the scientific community is divided in two groups:

~80% of the scientists don't think A can work
The remaining ~20% think A can work

It's difficult to formally prove A (no one has done it yet) and basically not possible to experimentally verify it (we only have some not-so-strong empirical evidences). There are also some sort of philosophical issues (even if the topic is really technical). However, if formally proved, it would have a huge impact on both research and industry.
I think that group 1 is wrong and also group 2 is wrong. The truth, in my vision, is in the middle, and my research focuses on this: trying to find a different modeling or trying to formally prove only part of A, or A but with some extra assumptions, and so on.
However, during the years, these two "factions" started to diverge more and more on opinions, to such an extent that the group 2 now always bases their claims on a couple of very controversial papers (which most people, including me, think are flawed). This way of reasoning of group 2 made most of the community (group 1) to believe that any research claiming A is just wrong (which is not true).
And then, there is me. Probably because I arrived at a later stage of this "discussion", I see things in a different manner: there is hope for A, but we need to recognize the limits of A and the fact that the state-of-the-art works on A have problems. However, when I submit a paper on this topic (from a position paper, to a super-technical paper), I very often get reviews like:

From group 1: "A is a shitty thing", "Oh no, another paper on A", "This is not interesting for the community" *
From group 2: "We already proved A, why we need this work?"

*These are textual transcripts of sentences in reviews of top conferences/journals.
And often these reviews are opinion-based and not fact-based, which make me very frustrated, because they don't criticize the work itself (formal proofs, etc.), but the topic.
Luckily, I have sometimes received reviews that really appreciate my work and some scientists have told me that my way is the right thing to do. However, publishing (especially in top journals and conferences) is very difficult in this way, because I always get at least some reviewers against me (in one sense or in the other, often both of them). Editors most of the time don't care about the controversial reviews, they just reject the paper.
What I'm doing now, for papers on A, is to publish in less-important journals or in journals not 100% on topic, but this reduces the visibility of my works (and unfortunately impact my career...). This makes me sad and I'm really thinking to abandon this topic. Getting a rejection is always frustrating, but getting many rejections based on opinions is really terrible...
I don't know if there is a solution or what I should do. For the pure research spirit, I may publish just on Arxiv or so, hoping that someone will notice them... but you know, an academic career requires you to publish, and to publish in good journals/conferences...
Any suggestions?

A principle in rhetorics and the art of persuasion states that it is useful to preemptively address any criticism that you expect will be leveled at you after you make your argument, by raising the objection yourself and then explaining why it’s not valid while you are making the argument in the first place. * If you do this in a thoughtful way, a potential critic might be converted into a supporter.
Thus, instead of laying out your case following the rough template of

[make a claim/hypothesis/etc]
[present first supporting argument]
[present second supporting argument]
[etc]

you could instead use a structure such as

[make a claim/hypothesis/etc]
[present first supporting argument]
[present second supporting argument]
[etc]
[raise first possible objection, then address it]
[raise second possible objection, then address it]
[etc]

Now, it is not always possible to foresee all objections that could be raised by someone. (This is especially true since we are mainly thinking here about objections that are invalid, and can therefore be successfully defended against!) However, in your case you have already heard the main invalid objections raised several times, and can therefore preemptively defend against them according to this recipe.
Here’s how this can work in practice. The way to defend against the objection

"Oh no, another paper on A"

Is by making it very very clear in the first place that your paper is not “another paper on A”. That is, suppose that in the introduction to a rejected paper you wrote

In this paper we show that A can work in a scenario in which [some extra assumptions].
[proceeding to describe your solution]

While accurate, this may not provide enough context to differentiate what you’re doing from the typical “paper on A”, which can lead to the sort of knee-jerk reaction from the reviewer that you quoted. Instead, maybe write something like

Many papers have been written claiming to show that A can work. We do not make such a claim, and indeed believe the earlier attempts to show this are incomplete and that the problem may continue to resist attempts at a rigorous solution because of the inherent difficulty of either formally proving or experimentally verifying A.
Instead, our goal is more modest, and therefore more achievable. We show that, if one is willing to assume [extra assumptions], the problem becomes tractable. In that case, a version of A can indeed be made to work through a reasonably straightforward application of [technique].

It seems to me that someone from the anti-A faction is likely to treat your claims with a bit more respect after a paragraph like this.
Similarly, the second objection

We already proved A, why we need this work?

can also be preemptively addressed by carefully considering what the reviewers’ misconception is about what your paper is doing, what the other papers about A are doing, and how those two things differ, and making sure to explicitly point out that possible source of confusion and clarify it. For example, you can insert somewhere a paragraph along the following lines:

It should be emphasized that the earlier papers [X, Y, Z] have proposed interesting ways to make A work, as well as reasonable arguments to support those proposals. Thus, it might appear that the current work, which shows that A works under additional assumptions, is superseded by these earlier results. That is not the case; the reason is that the current solution is in fact completely rigorous, and thus demonstrates A under the extra assumptions in a more satisfactory and complete manner than the previous works. Moreover, our formal verification gives further insight into the nature of A that may turn out to be applicable to additional situations, perhaps leading to future results, or even to an eventual completely rigorous demonstration that A can work in full generality.

Summary: at the end of the day, there is always the possibility of getting unfair and invalid criticism, either of a kind that you didn’t expect, or of a kind that you did expect and tried to address preemptively but where the critic simply isn’t receptive to your reasoning. However, the method of preemptively addressing criticism will be able to successfully shoot down at least some of the objections, with some probability. It gives you the best shot at convincing people that your arguments are valid and “interesting for the community”. That seems like the best that one can hope for in this situation. Good luck!
* Source: this is a “principle” that I invented. However, I’m pretty sure I’m far from the first person to discover the usefulness of this technique, so maybe it actually is a principle that was explicitly formulated by someone at some point.


Citing a Book in Projects/ Research Papers? I am Currently Working on Writing my Undergraduate Minor Project Report. For that I need to Study Various Topics from Various Books.
Now, My Process is to Read the Chapters Thoroughly and then write them in my own words (Basically Paraphrasing). But this isn't like Paraphrasing a Paragraph or a Statement. It's a Whole Chapter.
So, Should I Cite the Book from which I read the Chapter ?
If Yes, Then How ?, Because the Topics would be Spread over a Range of Pages.
Now, I know about Research Papers that this will be Considered as Basic Knowledge and Would'nt be cited. Am I Right ?

Should I Cite the Book from which I read the Chapter ?

Yes, doing otherwise is surely plagiarism.

If Yes, Then How ?, Because the Topics would be Spread over a Range of Pages.

You could open with: The following paraphrases A, B & C 1.

I know about Research Papers that this will be Considered as Basic Knowledge and Would'nt be cited.

The phrase Basic knowledge is subjective. Regardless, over-citing is harmless.


Intellectual Property Assignment Agreements for Ph.D. students - What is normal? As an incoming Ph.D. student I was asked to sign an intellectual property assignment agreement in addition to an employment contract as a condition for receiving a tuition reduction and a stipend.  The wording was rather vague, and contained 'legalese'. I have no experience with this. So, I do not know anything about it, and I do not know if the "agreement" I signed contains anything abnormal, because of the way it was written.

Is this normal practice?

If so, what is contained in a standard intellectual property agreement?

Very roughly, at the US universities I have worked for, the IP policies have been along these general lines:

When you write a paper or book as part of your research, you get to keep the copyright and any royalties.  But the university gets permission to use the work internally, keep a copy in the library, etc.
If, as part of your research, you invent something that's patentable, contact the university's IP office.  They will help you with the patent process.  You and the university will hold the patent together, or some similar arrangement. They have to agree on any licensing agreements, etc (where you sell some company the rights to use your patent), and they get a large share (perhaps half or so) of whatever royalties or fees are earned.

(I'm a pure mathematician, and we never invent anything patentable, so I always skim the patent part and may have got it wrong :-)


What kind of administrative duties might a postdoctoral associate be expected to take on? Applying for a postdoctoral research role in the UK, the application says I should demonstrate willingness to take on administrative tasks. Can anyone tell me about what kind of administrative tasks a postdoctoral research associate might be expected to take on? Does anyone have any experience? I'm trying to tailor my application, but I don't want to go into depth on administrative experience that might not be relevant to the role.

I think you need to find out exactly what they are expecting from you.  I would normally associate postdoc positions with research duties rather than administrative duties.  Some exceptions that I have known involve postdocs who are expected to act as the supervisor for a number of graduate or undergraduate researchers, but these are unusual cases.  Contact the people offering the position, and find out what exactly the administrative duties mean: otherwise, you won't know how to tailor your application, and (more importantly) you might end up in a position you really didn't want!


PhD student wanting to do "the minimum required" I have met a strange situation with one of my 2nd-year PhD students. During the past year, their progress was minimum. They implement and retest existing literature material but haven't been able to develop new contributions based on their research plan (although the ideas are there). I set up a monitoring scheme with biweekly written updates and feedback, sent multiple (written) warnings and talked to the student many times (in the presence of other faculty).

At the annual review, the student was warned that they are endangering to fail their PhD. The student then complained that they believe I have "unrealistic requirements" from them, that I should judge them based on the "minimum requirements" for a PhD. They provided an example of other students from different groups (not my group) that are doing worse than the student.

The minimum requirements of the university are "a thesis with evidence of original work and independent critical ability considered suitable for publication". So, the student claims that my requests for submitting conference/journal publications during the PhD are unrealistic.

Have you ever met this situation before? How do you deal with this?
I have no control over the student's funding stream (external). The only thing I can do is to make a suggestion at the School level. But this will become a "what about" discussion.

There should be some university rules which state what the student has to do in order to obtain the phd. Treat them as a contract -- do they state exactly some minimum requirements to obtain the phd? Then, a student satisfying thoss requirements should obtain the phd. If (what is more likely) they say something about you being able to state more requirements, then you can give more requirements (maybe after writing them down formally). (Or maybe the rules allow you to remove the student? If yes, you might want to think if you want and can do this.)

Please be also aware that you may be requesting too much.  Some instructors were always the best in research and may be biased when supervising.

If the student meets the minimum requirements, they should of course be granted the phd. Not doing more might or might not be a problem for the student's future. You should warn them that (e.g.) an academic career might be a problem afterwards, but, depending on the student's goals, receiving a "minimum phd" might be not at all a problem.

Many people in the world do only the minimum required for their job/studies. If the mimimum is defined well, this should not be a problem.


How would you ask your professor to be your supervisor? I am currently a graduate student. I've completed all the exams and I am currently looking for a supervisor for my master's dissertation. Few months ago I surveyed the professor I would like to have as my supervisor. However, he told me that probably he would have not been able to be my supervisor if I decided to graduate in July 2020 (as I intend to do), because he will probably be out of the country on the anticipated graduation date. He said that it is a moral duty for a supervisor to be there on the graduation date. Now, I really enjoyed his lectures, I consider him the best professor I have ever had and I think he is really skilled on the topic I am planning to discuss. Accordingly I would be willing to accept the risk that he will not be able to be there on the graduation date. How could I ask him to be my supervisor?

To make the answer formal, yes, you should ask him. This is best done in person, and one of the best approaches is just what you say here about his skill and your common interest in a topic. Let him know that you think he is the best person around to do this, and you won't have a problem, yourself, if he can't be at the graduation.

What you need is his signature, I assume, and not his physical presence to approve your completion.

He might say no, but if you don't ask, the answer is certainly no.

Good luck.


Citing papers that use unpublished data that I want to publish I am getting ready to submit a method paper which describes a dataset that I had created. However, I was late getting the paper ready, and a couple of other colleagues used the dataset in their own papers, and those papers are already online (I am coauthor in them).

The other papers do not describe in detail how the dataset was constructed. I am afraid that if cite them, it might harm my chances of getting my own paper on the dataset published. Any suggestions on what would be the right thing to do?

thanks!

If you have at least 40 % new material you can submit your paper to journals and you should also cite the other paper without any hesitation.


Is it possible to become an independent researcher with a PhD degree in Mechanical Engineering Dear Fellow Researchers,

I got my PhD degree in Mechanical Engineering from a EU university some time ago. I've got a good cv in terms of publications, peer-review work, participation in R&D projects, conferences, etc.

I think I've got some good ideas for research and development projects. However, in a Post-Doctoral position, I am very likely to be working on already approved projects, not my own ones.

So my question is: Is it possible to become an independent researcher?
All I need is to be able to apply for research funding. Is it possible? I can create a company or whatever is needed to get an affiliation, if that is needed.

What funding organizations would accept proposals in the field of Mechanical Engineering for those not currently working at a University/Research Centre? I am looking for EU funding organizations, but I am willing to accept those in the USA/CA/AU.

Any help appreciated,
Best Regards,
King Baboon

It is quite common in Germany and the Netherlands for "advanced" postdocs to write their own grant proposal. So I would challenge your assumption that you need to become independent in order to do your own research as a postdoc. Instead I would suggest that staying within academia and write your grant proposal there, has a much higher chance of success.


Can I ask a postdoc who has closely supervised my research to write me a letter of recommendation? When I apply to a PhD program, may I ask a postdoc who closely supervised me to write a recommendation letter? My supervisor also has written one for me, but I believe the postdoc can comment on my research skills in a more detailed and precise way. Does a postdoc have enough authority to convince admission committee?

While it's possible that a postdoc letter (in the absence of further context) might carry less weight, there are good reasons to ask them anyway:

the letter is a testimonial about your ability to do research. A postdoc who's worked with you is in a much better position to say something nontrivial about this. Lines like "I closely worked with so and so" carry weight.
the postdoc might know faculty at the university you're applying to. In that case the letter carries even more weight (I'm likely to pay more attention to letters from people that I know)


In computer science, is omission of negative experimental evaluation results research misconduct? In computer science, a large portion of people develop algorithms, and demonstrate their effectiveness by running experiments to compare with other existing approaches in their research papers. In these experiments, as far as I know, there are two possible ways to purposely hide data:

Ashley has developed algorithm X and decided to experimentally compare it with algorithm Y. She compared them on benchmark set A, B and C. She found that on benchmark C, algorithm Y outperformed X, so she decided to not report on C. In the paper, she also only claims algorithm X outperformed on A and B.
Bill has developed algorithm P. He compared P with other algorithms Q, R and S on some benchmark instances. He found that P outperformed Q and R, but not S on these benchmark instances. He decided to not report the comparison between P and S. In the paper, he also only claims algorithm P outperformed Q and R.

Are Ashley and Bill’s actions considered research misconduct?

tl;dr-  In general, suppressing negative results harms objective analysis but can make the research appear more significant.  How people feel about this practice depends on their stake in it.

Pure consumers are the most likely to feel that it's misconduct.

Pure investees are the most likely to feel that it's acceptable/appropriate.

Others in the field likely have mixed feelings since they benefit from the practice as investees but are harmed by it as consumers.

Looking forward, there's a growing understanding that these practices pollute the literature and will need to be weeded out.  However, we're not quite there yet.
Pure consumers are likely to consider it misconduct
At one extreme, readers who have no affiliation with the research are the most likely to object.  Such readers might be trying to select an algorithm for their own research or business application; they want to know the good and the bad equally, so having the bad omitted is purely detrimental to them.
For example:

Ashley has developed algorithm X and decided to experimentally compare it with algorithm Y. She compared them on benchmark set A, B and C. She found that on benchmark C, algorithm Y outperformed X, so she decided to not report on C. In the paper, she also only claims algorithm X outperformed on A and B.

If a reader is trying to select which algorithm to use, then they'd likely want all relevant benchmarks.  Doubly so if Benchmark C is more closely related to their application.
Pure investees are most likely to consider it acceptable/appropriate
At the other extreme, those invested in the research effort itself are most likely to want to see it presented in a positive light.  Investees include the researcher themself; their supervisor(s); their institution; and any media services that report on their work (e.g., journals).
Pure investees are those who aren't also consumers.  For example, a university's promotional news team is a pretty pure investee, as they basically want to make the research shine.
For example:

Ashley has developed algorithm X and decided to experimentally compare it with algorithm Y. She compared them on benchmark set A, B and C. She found that on benchmark C, algorithm Y outperformed X, so she decided to not report on C. In the paper, she also only claims algorithm X outperformed on A and B.

If Ashley's supervisor feels strongly about the result, they may go into full-promotional-mode, including contacting the university's promotional team and others to advertise the work.  Ashley's supervisor and related promoters might wench at any criticism or negative analysis that might detract from their efforts, so they're more likely to appreciate the comparison using Benchmark C not being reported.
Fellow practitioners may have mixed feelings
Other computer scientists may have mixed feelings since they're consumers, but likely engaging in the same behaviors.
In practice, I've seen researchers acknowledge that they understand such behaviors to be detrimental, but still argue that not downplaying/omitting criticism would make their work appear unduly weak compared to other researchers'.
Overall, practitioners seem to generally understand that it's sort-of misconduct in the sense that it shouldn't be done, but that it's acceptable in the sense that authors often feel like they must do it to play on a level playing field with others who do.


Should I tell my referees that my application got rejected ? (I intend to re-apply) I applied to a Masters program and unfortunately, I was rejected.
I intend to re-apply to another school and another program by the end of April, and I haven't had the chance to find other referees.
When I re-apply, should I simply email my previous referees and request for another reference letter? or should I email them now casually and update them that my application was rejected?

I think the answer may depend on the exact relationship you have with your referees. I would think that if they were willing to write you a reference letter in the first place, they are invested in you and your academic success enough to warrant an update on your graduate admissions status. I think if you just emailed them for a new letter, they may wonder why you're requesting more letters relatively late in the application cycle, or they may ask about the status of your past applications. In either case, it is likely that you will need to disclose your rejection, so perhaps disclosing it first is a better strategy.

Plus, this may be a good opportunity to solicit feedback from them on your past application so you can incorporate any feedback given into your April application.


Asking about how to apply to 2 open positions in same department in same group I am applying to some phd positions in Australian university in Mathematics in Pure maths Dept in same working group ( Number Theory) and 2 professors work in the Field I want to work in and the method of applying is that they have  link of " Apply Now" in the website.
So, There are 2 columns after apply now 1 in which CV is to be uploaded and 1 in which Motivation Letter is to be uploaded.  CV is to be uploaded will be same(obviously).

But Should motivation/ Cover Letter be same or not?

Let's call professors as Mr. X and Mr. Y. My interest area completely align with Mr.X and there are some regions in which  my Interest doesn't aligns with Prof. Y. But the regions in which Interest aligns with Prof. Y are same as regions in which interest aligns with X.
Kindly Guide me what should I do in this case!
Thank You!

At Australian universities, there are always selection criteria.  If the selection criteria are identical, you can submit identical applications.  If they are not identical, customize your applications to match the selection criteria.
Do address your letter to the correct professor.
If it is true, it would be fine to say in your application that you are equally interested in both positions.  It is quite likely X and Y know each other and are coordinating already.
$ $


Should I challenge my professor who thinks he's always right? One of my professors has been in the IT development fields for over 40 years. He thinks he is up-to-date with all the latest research and technology. But I believe he's not.

The problem is - he hates when a student (like me) dares to point out his mistakes or flaws in reasoning. Or when a student suggests a better (modern) solution to a problem.

How to deal with such a situation - should I keep challenging him or keep quiet until the end of semester? I don't want to lose grades (he's been known to give lower grades to students who asked him too many questions he wasn't able to properly answer).

Short answer: Probably not.

As you pointed out, you may lose out on grades by challenging this professor. A larger problem, in my opinion, is when you (the student) approach the class with an attitude of discovering the professor's many mistakes. With this attitude, you also lose out on the opportunity to learn from his expertise. While this particular professor may not be as modern as you would like, it does not mean you cannot learn from him!

Keep quiet until the end of the semester, except when you have a valid question. And don't  approach intending to prove him wrong; approach intending to find out how you can learn from what he knows.  Ask questions because you want to learn, not because you want to prove the professor wrong. If you believe you know a better solution, it might be appropriate to ask "Would this solution also work? If not, why not?" Ask, don't tell. Your professor is human too, and most of us have a hard time always responding graciously to a smarty-pants student who thinks they know more than we do!


A student keeps using a native language while asking questions in the class when the course is taught in English I am assisting a statistics course in a university, and my main job in the course is conducting problem solving sessions. The course is taught in English, and students interact with me in English. However, there is one particular student who keeps using their native language. Whenever he does that, I reply in English, hoping that he would start using English. But he doesn't.

I am sure that everybody does understand what he says because all the students are from the same part of the country. But I find it quite awkward. On the other hand, I feel that if I request him to use English, he might take it offensively, or he might not be able to express what he wants to say clearly. Should I simply ignore this particular case and move on? Or should I tell him somehow? If yes, what is the best way to convey this?

If you want a non-confrontation approach, simply repeat the question in English before answering it.

Hearing the translation may help the student in question see how to phrase their questions in English. It also give a polite hint that the question should have been asked in English.


Is it ethically problematic for an internal candidate to attend the job talk of a candidate for the same job? I noticed that my university has been considering "internal" candidates more strongly for permanent faculty positions. These are candidates who have received their masters degree and/or a PhD at the same university.

So when candidates are interviewed, the top contenders are invited for an "on-campus" interview/presentation.

Are there any ethics involved with one internal candidate attending the other internal candidate's "faculty interview presentation"? Wouldn't there be bias established in that manner for or against both candidates since one candidate would receive "pointers" (in)advertently?

Would it be a different situation if the competition for the internal candidate was to be an external candidate?

First, as I inquired about in the comments, most job interviews have both public and private aspects.  Public means that they are open to the entire department (or maybe, and probably in some formal sense are, open to the entire university community): e.g.  there should be at least one job talk, and most often this talk will be advertised on the calendar like any other talk, sometimes called a "special colloquium talk" or something like that.  That makes it a departmental event.  As a department member you certainly have the right to go.  There are also usually some private "interview" portions: this is several faculty members asking questions of the candidate, either one-on-one or in groups (or at meals; even lunches and dinners are part interview, really).  These are usually not public events; rather they are activities on the part of the faculty search committee, though in some contexts, e.g. at a small liberal arts college (SLAC) students and other non-faculty members may play an auxiliary role.  Certainly as a candidate for a job you can't be part of the search committee to hire into that job: that is the Cadillac of conflicts of interest!  So you should try to distinguish in your mind between "search committee activities" and "public events" and be sure not to attend the former.  (As usual, if you are in doubt, ask.)

Now I want to make a few comments on StrongBad's (good, I upvoted it) answer.

  One of the jobs of internal candidates, like all member of a department, is to help recruit the individuals being interviewed such that whoever is given the offer, hopefully you, is more likely to accept the offer.

At least at a large research university, it probably not the case that all department members are involved in recruiting for faculty jobs (either temporary or tenure-track).  For instance students are usually not involved at all other than maybe wandering into the job talk (though at a SLAC they might be), and temporary faculty are not on search committees for permanent faculty.  So I don't necessarily agree with the above sentence.  Moreover being involved in "recruiting" for a position one has applied for again sounds like a whopper of a conflict of interest.

  When you are interviewing after an external candidate, the thing to remember is that in most cases watching what someone else does is not going to help you. One case where there could be a definite advantage is if the search committee has some fixed interview questions and you attend an event that gives you access to these prior to your interview.

Yes, I completely agree with that, and it answers one of the OP's main questions.  Most academic interviews I know are not sufficiently formalized that watching someone else's in advance would help you with yours.  Most questions asked in academic interviews are not content questions or "gotcha" interview questions: they are questions about you.  I also think that a job talk is a strange place for asking pointed interview questions.

So here is my answer: being an internal candidate for a job is potentially awkward enough so that you should seek some guidance about what to do.  If the job talk and the interview aspects are not separated sufficiently clearly in your department, then I think the ethically correct thing to do is just stay away from the whole thing (but tell the faculty in advance that you are planning to do this, in the unlikely event that they have other plans).  If the question really is attending another job candidate's talk: I see no ethical problem with it, and if you're in a department where it really is expected that faculty in your position attend all such departmental events (again I'm thinking of a small department) then maybe you should go.  It is an academic talk after all and you might learn something.  However I think that you should really (forgive my colorful language) shut the hell up as an audience member in this situation.  Interacting with another candidate in any active way is also a huge conflict of interest.  If you have a sincere academic question, of course you can find a way to communicate your question to the candidate later on.

I don't see how multiple internal candidates makes much difference.  I guess that if I knew the other candidate very well and was very friendly with her, I would be more inclined to come to her talk rather than skip it...and especially I would be more inclined to ask what her preference is.  I would not do that for an external candidate because it's a potentially loaded question that they shouldn't have to deal with.


How to write an untested hypothesis? When writing a journal paper, we are expected to write in third person. But when I present some assumptions of other researchers and then want to say that I disagree with that and then present my own hypothesis, how do I write it?

Example:
Artificial neural networks store neural weights, which are a generalized way of memorizing and abstracting training data, similar to the neurons of the human brain.
I disagree with that because I theorize that memories are not stored in the neurons. I don't have any evidence, but can provide my theories about how memory storage actually works.

But I can't start writing it as "My hypothesis is that...", because it isn't in third person. What is the right way to write it?

You don't need to drop out of the normal first-person-plural way of academic writing. You can write something like:

  Bob e.a. [1] theorize that (something you disagree with), but we are skeptical because (reasons you disagree). In this paper we offer an alternative hypothesis (your own ideas) and propose experiments to support it.

It doesn't matter whether you're a single person writing the paper or a team, you use the "academic we". That's just the convention.


Should ongoing business experience be mentioned in faculty job applications? I am currently on the academic job market, have already sent and going to send a number of applications (mostly to US universities). My current institution, where I am a postdoc, is among the top in Europe and has a very strong startup culture and support. As a result, I have recently co-founded a tech startup in my field, together with my professor/supervisor and colleagues. For several personal and legal reasons, I mostly work on the research and technology side of the startup, not on the operation side (e.g., I help with but don't directly go to seek funding, meet investors). To me, the startup is more like a side project, an experiment. My dream career is still in academia.

In my faculty job applications, I mention my business experience (co-founder) in two places: in my CV and my cover letter (one sentence). I think it could be a positive point as it shows I have some industrial/business/practical experience outside academia, especially when the job ads say "industrial experience is a plus / preferred."

However, on reflection, I am now afraid that this could actually be a negative point from the academic view, that could hinder my applications. For example:

One may think there is a conflict of interest (although in my current institution, many profs involve directly or indirectly in startups).
They may question my commitment to academia, like: how can he focus on academic research and teaching if he will be involved in a startup, which often take an enormous amount of time? Especially when his company is in Europe while he works at our university in the US.
Similarly, they may think I am not serious in applying to faculty positions.

Do you think I made a mistake including my business experience in my applications? Since I still have quite a few applications to submit, should I remove the experience completely?

The first time I taught I was hired solely on the basis of my work experience.  This was in a field that trains students for careers in a specific industry, but I doubt I was the first person to who this has ever happened.  Academics are not necessarily going to have a bias against you for having industry experience.  If you can teach and are an asset to the department that's what they'll judge you on.  Not abstract ideas of being the "wrong" kind of person.


Label based in text citation In german computer science it is quite common to use citations like [HoBo12] or [HoBo12, pp.1-4] for say, Hoy, Jane; Boy, John 2010: The great story. The rules for composing this label depend on the amount of authors and their order. Seemingly, this is defined in DIN5015-2 and ISO690, but the wikipedia page only talks about the bibliography and not about the in text references. Weirdly, there is a Zotero style named DIN1505-2 which kind of does that, but still seems to have a few bugs or the official definition (which I can't find talking about this topic) thinks that weird things are nice e.g. [HoBo12, pp.1-2, WVDE13, p.2] (notice that a ; would be nicer).

I think this style is quite nice and would like to use it for an English text. Therefore I would like to choose an accepted style from an english speaking nation.

Question: Are there any other styles in that form (maybe even defined in a Zotero CSL-format)? I still think it looks a bit big with the additional page information. Something like this would be perfect [HoBo12:1-2; WVDE13:2]. Is this an offical style?

I can't recall ever seeing such a format being used, particularly in the context of books (as opposed to papers). Part of this is, I think, a desire to be clear. For instance, what does [WVDE13:2] mean? Does it refer to the second chapter, or to page 2? Or does it refer to a specific work? Without the clarification of "p.", it's relatively ambiguous from a first glance. As a reader of a book, that can get very annoying over extended periods of time.

Given that, you are free to use any style that your publisher allows; if it's something relatively unorthodox, then you should explain that somewhere (perhaps a comment prefacing the bibliography would suffice).


Is it possible to improve(fix) a paper after its acceptance by the conference After getting the conference's decision to publish a paper there is a short period of time to prepare and sent a camera ready version. However, during the review period, it was found that the paper can be improved significantly or that the minor bug can be fixed.

Is it acceptable to change the scientific content of the paper after it's acceptance?
If yes, to what extent one can change the paper? I am especially interested in the minor setting of the experiment.
Should one inform the conference chairman if he's gonna make changes (fixes)?

Generally, papers presented at conferences include the preliminary results, and the purpose is to receive feedback on your preliminary results and improve them for the final study. If this is the case with your paper, I think you could consider making the improvement after the conference, since you are going to improve the study anyways later on based on the inputs you receive at the conference. However, if you strongly feel that making the change would improve the paper significantly, you can write to the Chairman and explain your concern. If he agrees, you can make the change.


At the age of 27 is it worth changing graduate schools and starting again? I am interested in areas of theoretical physics/mathematics which simply don't exist in my institute. I tried 2 or 3 different groups here which were not in my interest (but I felt I had some transferable skills) and it didn't work out.

There is no age limit for graduate studies. People are free to apply at whatever stage of life they choose, if they feel it's the right move for them.

As an example of this, a very good friend of mine was a social sciences major as an undergraduate, and worked in Washington, D.C., for a number of years before leaving politics and starting a PhD program in medical physics—and he did this in his mid-thirties. I've worked in the same department as other postdocs who made the career choice even later—they were in their early fifties!

So I would not look at your case as hopeless at all. If you find something else that inspires you, go for it.


Catching small errors in lecture materials I'm a Ph.D. student in linguistics and a relatively new course instructor. My understanding of the material is not in doubt. But I'm doing a really poor job of catching small errors. Even when I check my lecture slides afterwards, I don't find them all. Almost every week, I'm having to email my students at least once telling them that diagram X was mislabeled or example Y was in the wrong place or I said something completely backwards. I don't want to end up overapologizing, but I feel like my teaching is unacceptably sloppy. I do put a lot of time and effort into considering/rehearsing how to teach things, and I compare my approaches to materials from several previous instructors of the same courses. This does not seem to have been enough.

I normally take pride in getting details right. Heck, I used to work as a proofreader and built up quite a stellar reputation! I know that teaching a course is a big job and that I have the instincts of a perfectionist. Nonetheless, I'm doing a much poorer job than usual when it comes to getting things right. If I were one of my own students, I think I'd be rolling my eyes at myself by now.

What sorts of strategies do others use in order to catch errors in their own teaching ahead of time? I'm very urgently wanting this to be less of a problem. There's no need for these little disruptions and I'm irritated with myself for confusing my students so much.

Thank you!

If you catch this during teaching, this means that you probably should rehearse (out loud) and then similarly things should emerge. You already mentioned you rehearse, but maybe you need to rehearse in a more elaborate manner (in a different room, in front of a mirror, etc.) to change your mindset and then find new mistakes. If you rehearse in your head in front of your PC, you are stuck in the same state of mind and won't find mistakes.

Other typical approaches:

Typical proofread advice

Read from back to front and mirror images/figures to get a fresh view upon things. This helps finding misplaced labels.
Spellcheckers and other digital proofing tools (programs which check if borders are met, elements are hidden, etc.)

Teaching notes as bullet points, which you periodically check during the lecture, to ensure you are still on track and have told everything you want to tell (i.e. have not forgotten some points)

These should also uncover any kind of logical mistakes. If you follow your line of thought during rehearsal, this should help explaining correctly and in order.
Notes provide self-confidence, which greatly reduces being error-prone. If you are less nervous, things go easier and mistakes are not so disrupting.

Find someone to proofread (either mutual agreement with someone or pay someone until you are more experienced. A student could be a good choice)

Finally, things can and will go wrong. It is more about how you handle the mistakes. Maybe simply update your slides after the lecture and tell the student next week, that last weeks slides were updated, with comments where things were not explained correctly.


How to react when encountering students who have previously failed my course? Context: I am an assistant professor of mathematics at a small liberal-arts college in the US.

I did my graduate work at a large public university, and there I rarely encountered students who had previously taken a class from me, let alone ones who had failed one of my courses.  Now that I'm at a much smaller institution it happens somewhat frequently, and I've only finished one semester here!

At this time I have no idea how I should react to these encounters.  Generally former students and I exchange a pleasant greeting, but I find myself instinctively trying to avoid students who've failed because I'm afraid that they are still angry at me, I don't want them to feel bad, etc.

The title of my question says it all: How should I react when encountering students who have failed one of my courses?  I could simply treat them like any other student, but I'm concerned about reinforcing the stereotype of "the tone-deaf mathematician with poor social skills."

Perhaps this question is a better fit for the interpersonal stack exchange, but I figured I'd start here.

Since you are at a small liberal arts college, I think you should not underestimate how much your own actions contribute to the culture of the college community. The notion of "avoiding" students is not something that you or your college wants to be known for (I imagine)! I think it is always best happily greet students that you know, perhaps ask them how things are going, etc. On some level, this kind of pleasant behavior is a professional obligation.

I don't think you should act any differently towards students who have failed your course (vs. students who did not fail, or haven't taken a course from you, etc.). Be cordial, and if the student wants to avoid you, then let them.

I will add that, while it's possible the student is mad at you, they may also be some combination of embarrassed and mad at themselves for failing. If they are embarrassed, then you avoiding them might make them feel worse, and you engaging with them might help them to get over the embarrassment.


CV for tenure-track application: not sure whether to include Master's thesis I was wondering about whether I should include/mention my Master's thesis in my CV. This doesn't count as a publication, since it was not published, and it's also not an original contribution. Thus, it doesn't belong to the "Publications" sections.

So where should I put it? Should I put the title in the point where I describe my Master's degree? Should I simply forget about it and let it go?

Create a section for theses and list both your MSc and PhD theses titles there. Or put it under Education.

(As a sidenote: you worry too much about style. What's important in a CV is the content, not so much the style.)


English certificate for postdoc in the UK I am applying for a postdoc in the UK. I hold an academic IELTS certificate. Does anyone know is that enough for a Tier-2 visa?
Thanks in advance

Being a Tier 2 migrant here myself, I can confirm that IELTS Academic exam is accepted for Tier 2 applications. The general rules are here.

However, a word of caution is needed. UKVI has recently changed the list of approved test providers, and IELTS franchise seems to split into "IELTS" and "IELTS for UKVI" providers. Only "IELTS for UKVI" providers are approved for immigration purposes. The exams are essentially the same, it is only the level of screening, security and scrutiny which is different.

It is not clear to me whether the  IELTS certificates issued before the split are still accepted by UKVI. Many people assume that they should because the laws can not be applied retrospectively, but IANAL. I would like to know the answer, too.


Discussing time limits in the limitations section? Is it common to discuss the fact that one didn't have time to do more reading, or didn't have time to elaborate certain sections, in the "limitations" section of a thesis?

No. It not common, nor should you do it! As paul garrett pointed out, this type of excuse makes it seem as though you didn't care or couldn't be bothered to do a better job.

I would add also that no matter how much time and effort you have put into developing an idea and writing your paper, it is almost inevitable that there will  be something that you missed or could have done better had you had/taken more time. Even the magnum opus on which you have spent your entire lifetime will be superseded by better or more complete thoughts; this is an inevitable reality of academic writing, and not one you should apologize for.

Perhaps especially as a student, one struggles to find the balance that represents maximum output for minimum time spent. Knowing when to 'let go' is a function of maturity and experience. When you've made that decision (or have had it made for you, due to time constraints outside your control), accept that this might be better, but don't apologize for the inevitable.


Apply for PhD positions with only one (or no) reference (letter of recommendation) After applying for a number of PhD positions I ended up with a surprisingly high rejection rate, and as little as 3 acceptances. Waiting for a positive answer from other labs (which I liked a lot better), I ended up inadvertently losing these 3 offers as well.

This seems to have been very unwise in hindsight, but at the time I did not believe I would get so many subsequent rejections (I still find it hard to believe...).

In any case, I have to apply to more labs now, and one of my referees refuses to provide further references for me because he already did it for quite a few of my applications, and is also - in his own words - "more than irritated" that I took the liberty to turn down any offers at all. I can't say I entirely disagree with him, since I actually did feel a bit guilty in the first place for asking him to be my referee for so many applications.

So, here I am, and I would be very curious whether you have any ideas:

If there is anything I could say to maybe change his mind (currently not responding to my emails).
If there is any way to make people whose labs I apply to understand why I can only provide one reference without completely ruining my chances.

Sadly, I am applying for a field a bit different from what I nominally studied (cognitive neuroscience as opposed to molecular neuroscience), and there are no other referees I can choose from with whom I have worked on cognitive topics. Also, the referee in question was my MSc. supervisor, so I would immagine people will like to hear from him anyway.

The answers to your questions relatively:

No. He is currently very angry with you. Because probably he lost a lot of reputation. A letter of recommendation does not only mean "Take this guy, he's great.", but also means "I entirely trust this guy and I guarantee that he will not leave you in the lurch." By getting acceptance and not taking the offer is usually interpreted as hesitancy. Thus, people from the labs you've turned down will consider your advisor as someone who easily recommends a student. They will think that a student does this even at the beginning will easily give up on tough research duties.
Conspiracy theory: the subsequent rejections may be the result of grapevine. In my country, top universities' professors are usually classmates or former colleagues. If a student applies with a good background and strong recommendations, they call each other and ask about that student. You know, if that they ever heard about that guy, who is considerable. And guess what if one or two of them told: "I accepted him and he ended up not even starting."

I think, for a short period of time, you should lower your standards. Try applying a lab in your field.

Don't send consecutive mails to your advisor. Talk to him face-to-face. Ask him if you can do something to make it up. At that point, you should be prepared to take no for an answer.


Postdoc at a research hospital for a physicist (non radiation) I am a physicist with a background in computational physics and imaging, and I received an offer for a NIH postdoctoral fellowship at a very good research hospital on the East Coast. I would join a group of medical doctors working on a particular protein, and I am trying to decide if it would be a good choice career wise. The lab has good instruments, but I am a bit worried of being the only one with a quantitative background in the research group.

Is there anyone who successfully did the physics-medicine transition? And is it possible to go back to more basic science after a biochem-med postdoc? Other things I should consider?

I'll answer the second two questions.

  Is there anyone who successfully did the physics-medicine transition?

Yes, medical physicists exist.  Some are specially trained in that field, others made the transition.  A few years back they were in high demand.

  And is it possible to go back to more basic science after a
  biochem-med postdoc?

Possible, yes.  Probably few people want to because it's likely to lead to a pay cut, as last I heard there was high demand for medical physicists.


How to withdraw an under review manuscript from a journal when you decide you want to submit to another journal with a higher impact factor? I submitted my first article to a journal and the journal indicated that it was now under review.

Now, I want to withdraw my article. The journal has a lower impact factor than a different journal, and I want to submit the manuscript to the other journal with the higher impact factor.

Is it possible to withdraw a manuscript when it is under review?
How do you do this?

Technical aspects of withdrawal: Technically, you should be able to withdraw your manuscript from a journal any time prior to acceptance. This would usually be done either by using some kind of button in the submission management system, or by contacting the journal (e.g., editor, action editor, etc.).
Ethics and norms of withdrawal: However, there are reasons for withdrawing a manuscript that are appropriate and those that are inappropriate. After you submit your manuscript, the journal, the editors, and reviewers may begin expending effort and resources in processing your manuscript. It is considered poor form to waste their time, by withdrawing the manuscript for no good reason.
The appropriate time to consider impact factor is before you submit your manuscript to a journal. This is information that is available prior to submission. Thus, I think most academics would consider withdrawing a manuscript from a journal after submission based on impact factor to be very poor form.
In contrast, some acceptable reasons for withdrawing a manuscript during the peer-review process include the following:

You submitted to a predatory journal.
They are taking an excessive amount of time to process your submission.
Following a revise and resubmit, and you do not wish to make the revisions. That said, if the requested revisions are minor, and you withdraw at this point, this may not be received favourably by the editor.
You identify a fundamental flaw with your manuscript following submission. That said, minor problems can typically be addressed at the revision stage or by notifying the editor and asking them whether they would like you to correct the error now or at any potential revision stage.

Probably, if it is extremely early in the submission process, it would be more reasonable. E.g., you realise a few hours or perhaps a day after submission that you made a mistake.


Which citation style is the most concise and has the least impact on word count? I'm writing a research proposal with a small maximum word count. References are included in this word count. Fortunately, the citation style is not specified.

I was wondering if there is any (widely accepted) citation style that will generally produce the shortest citations. As far as I've found, MLA seems to be the shortest as it switches author names to "et al." when there's four or more authors, whereas other citation styles that I've looked at only switch with a higher number of authors. Is there any style that would consistently produce shorter citations?

Coming back to this question when writing a grant with very strict word limit, I discovered that the most concise citation AND bibliography style must be the Science (without titles).
Example:

  1.R. Hisakata, S. Nishida, A. Johnston, Curr. Biol. 26, 1911–1915 (2016).

You can find the citation-style-language csl file in the official csl styles github repository, that you can download and use in Zotero, Mendeley, RefWorks, etc.
If you're an EndNote person, see the style file in the most popular answer to this ResearchGate question


Can I mention the completion of online courses as professional qualifications when applying to university? I am applying now to a postgraduate program in Computer Science. In the application, there is a subsection where I can mention my professional qualifications; I am wondering if it is appropriate to mention the completion of a web-development online course (on Udemy) with uploading the certificate of that?

If the courses are relevant to your proposed research area, then yes. I did (after consulting with SE experts), was accepted.


My advisor wants me to reinvent the wheel My advisor introduced a model 15 years ago, published a lot of papers (including PNAS). Now, he makes me incorporate this model into well-established model from the neighboring field of research. I think he just tries to stay in the known waters (cite his own papers, etc). Of course, he is well aware (but not proficient) that everything we try now to research was already published in this neighboring field.

What should I do?

Continue to reinvent the wheel with minor modifications (people from the neighboring field will probably laugh)
Try to switch the project (although it will be hard)
Freelance in the "spare" time ;)

Edited after Piotr's remark. Hope that nailed it down a bit.

The issue seems to be that your advisor isn't willing to acknowledge that the problems he's attempting to work on have been solved. I would recommend bringing the relevant papers to him and discussing with him how his proposed projects differ from what already exists in the literature. This way, either (1) he'll clarify how his projects are different from the literature, or (2) you may be able to demonstrate to him that the problem is indeed solved.


Is conflict of interest applicable for independent research? How should I answer the conflict of interest question during submission of paper if I have worked independently without any funding agencies and as a sole author?

If your case is a case in which conflicts of interest do not apply, then you simply state:

  The author declares that she/he has no conflict of interest

assuming you are the sole author, in the appropriate section, usually stated Conflict of Interests. Note that some publishers, such as Elsevier, require you to sign a form for this purpose as well before even beginning the review process.

For further information you may refer this post:

Clear explanation of Conflict of Interest with examples in journal articles


Would preaching in a church be advantageous for becoming a lecturer? In general, the job of a lecturer (under Australian terminology- I think the terminology is different in America) can be divided up into two main areas of focus: research and teaching, with the latter involving writing up lesson and assessment plans, managing your tutors, delivering lectures to hundreds of students and maybe some tutorials to a few dozen students, marking and moderating assessment, etc. My understanding is that the people hired for these roles are often PhD students or postdocs who have also worked as tutors during their time as PhD students/postdocs - their tutoring gives them teaching experience, while their work as a PhD student or postdoc gives them research experience.

However, because tutorials are generally much smaller than a full lecture, and they would often be following someone else’s lecture notes rather than writing their own, I was wondering if it might be advantageous for someone in those positions to get some experience preaching in a church? Much like a lecturer, a preacher would need to write their own lesson plans, and then deliver the content of those lessons to an audience of hundreds of individuals, in a format fairly similar to that of a university lecture.

As a result, I could see an argument about why delivering Sunday sermons would be advantageous for developing some of the skills a university lecturer would need. However, I’m not certain if it would actually work in your favour if you were to list that experience on your CV.

And so, my Question: would a typical young researcher who is seeking a lecturer role find it advantageous to list experience working as a church preacher? While religious discrimination would of course be illegal, might they find it working against them?

Would preaching at a church help you to become a better lecturer? Almost certainly, as would any similar experience. During the later stages of my PhD I worked in a very popular small museum giving tours and answering questions from the public. I always tell my students that it was the best way for me to hone my speaking abilities: I really learned how to catch attentions and to convey information in a stimulating way. Further, answering hundreds of questions every day (some of which were strange to say the least) prepared me to diplomatically deal with whatever questions are tossed at me after lectures, talks, and conference papers. If preaching does similar for you, you'll see benefits.

Would putting preaching at a church on your CV help you land an academic job? No, except in the rare case of that being directly relevant to your teaching post: e.g. I had a housemate who did a PhD in religion, taught at a missionary training school, and landed a job at a religious affiliated Uni in the religion department...they would benefit from preaching on their CV. Just as my museum experience was considered "not lecturing", preaching would be the same. You're simply not drawing on the same pedagogical focus, nor are you teaching towards markable learning outcomes.

Edit to answer your final question. No, I truly doubt you would face any discrimination for mentioning preaching on your CV. You would, however, face panel members who would fail to see why such information is relevant on an academic CV. I didn't put my museum job on my academic CV when I was an early career researcher because it wasn't related to my academic work and was, thus, tangential.


Shifting to unrelated field after postdoc? Neurobiology to linguistics I am a 4th-year postdoc in molecular neurobiology, but I would like to shift to linguistics-related fields, particularly cognitive linguistics.
Long story short: I realized that I've been mixing up my interest and my true passion, neurobiology and linguistics. While both fields aim to understand the human mind (at different levels), I just find linguistics more fascinating and more rewarding to study. I am ready to commit myself to linguistics research.
I have thought about several options:

Look for a postdoc position directly in a lab which does cognitive linguistics. However, PIs usually hire postdocs in the same field, or at least possess some particular skills they need. I've met people who did a PhD in engineering but doing a postdoc in cognitive linguistics. However, given my background, how possible is this option? Do you know anyone who has similarly unrelated background but successfully switched their fields?
Do a postdoc in a lab which does interdisciplinary research, such as neurolinguistics (related to neurobiology, but more closely related to psycholinguistics). However, I think this option may not be much easier than option 1... Besides, it doesn't guarantee that I can eventually work in my favourite field, or it may take several postdoc positions to get there. This means I may need to go through more years of instability as a postdoc...
Do a second PhD. I am willing to do a second PhD, but the thing is, I am not sure if most PIs would recruit a PhD holder who was once committed to another field, not to mention that some universities may have special regulations on second PhD (e.g. funding).

Which options would you think is the best? What are the things I should also consider but I have missed? Do you have any experience that you would like to share?
Any advice would be appreciated greatly!
--
Edit:
From the comments I've got so far, option 3 doesn't sound like a good idea... I will focus on the other two options now.
From what I've learnt from other similar posts, most people switch between related fields, or at least there are overlaps between their current and target fields. I've also noticed that many successful field changes are from quantitative science to a field which requires quantitative skills (e.g. from computer science to synthetic biology). Unfortunately, none of the above cases applies to me, except that my current field and some sub-fields in my target field could be remotely related.
While I can still find links between these fields, my real challenge is:
What can I do to demonstrate to potential PIs that I will do well in a new field without relevant experience? (I don't have publications in my target field or related field.)

Disclaimer: I know nothing about research in neuroscience or linguistics, so my answer is about a general person who finished a PhD in topic X and wants to switch to topic Y.
I would go for options 1 or 2. Option 3 is generally not a great idea. A PhD means spending several years on starvation wages, and a good chunk of that would be spent rehashing things you already know, like research methodology, how to explore data and so on. A postdoc allows you to explore whether your true passion really is linguistics. Treat the postdoc as you would a PhD - you have two years to write a thesis (well, not really write a thesis, but get enough results to fill one). Postdocs are often given much more freedom to explore their interests so you could build your knowledge on the topic while not having to do like a decade of PhD studies.
I would suggest a fourth option: would you be able to get a faculty position in neuroscience and then start exploring your dream at your own pace? Faculty members are masters of their own fate (to an extent, certainly more than PhD and postdocs). You can decide that you want to change your focus, and as a faculty member you may actually find it much easier to do so.


Which writing style for uncertainties? There are different ways of writing uncertainty.  The siunitx manual says "In some fields, it is common to give the uncertainty in a number in brackets after the main part of the number...  Alternatively, the uncertainty may be given as a separate part following a sign."

Examples:

1.234(5)
1.234 ± 0.005

Which academic fields use which style in their journal articles?  Does it depend on the region?  Is there any agreed upon standard?

Yes, there is an agreed upon standard and it is specified in the Guide to the expression
of uncertainty in measurement (GUM), section 7.2.2, prepared by the Joint Committee for Guides in Metrology (an ISO committee).

Both forms are equally valid, and people use them indifferently. The first form is just more compact and it is particularly useful in tables, abstracts etc.

For an uncommon usage of the first form, see also this answer of mine on Physics SE.


Is improving a simple algorithm without beating the state of the art still publishable? In a particular field there are two algorithms being used:

Algorithm Simple: you understand it in five minutes, you can implement it in fifteen.
Algorithm State of the Art (SOA): requires very specific mathematical knowledge to understand and is hard to code. Beats Simple by a big margin, both in terms of speed and results.

However Simple is more popular because of its simplicity and not-so-bad results. Simple has 130 citations, SOA has 80. In 2016 Simple had 20 citations, SOA 17.

While trying to use the Simple paper, our results were so bad we spent more than a week looking for a bug in our implementation. Finally, we discovered a one line change that makes it work much better, improving a mathematical approximation in the Simple paper that is easily overlooked. After reviewing recent literature, it seems this is not known (we can reproduce recent papers).

We can prove that the one line change is statistically better and equally fast as Simple but statistically worse and slower than SOA. We also have a 5-line-change improvement which makes it both better and faster than Simple, worse results than SOA but slightly (10–20%) faster than SOA.

What should we do? Since we are not beating SOA's results and it is a one line change it may be hard to publish, but it is clearly something people in the field would profit from.

Edit: some have noted it's similar to this question. There are two differences:

We are not coming up with a different algorithm, just making a small modification.
On the other hand we are a simpler algorithm than SOA, and there's value in it. In particular the 1-line change is as simple as the Simple algorithm and the 5-line change is still much simpler than the SOA algorithm.

Sure this is publishable, but the real question is where?

The applied mathematical community, especially the one in which the state of the art methods are developed will probably not see the improvement of the simple algorithm as worth publishing in their venues. Why should they? They know that there is something better which they understand well. In fact, I know of at least one journal which states explicitly that algorithms published there need to beat the state of the art to be suited for them. But the community of practitioners who may be struggling with the nuts and bolts of the state of the art method and often fall back to use the simple method may be impressed.

So, choose you publication venue right and things should go well.


OpenStreetMaps in research publications: Is that possible? In connection with Scholia (https://tools.wmflabs.org/scholia/), we are making OpenStreetMap plots online with the tiler from Wikimedia Foundation. When presented online OSM-derived maps are not a problem. However, if we take a screenshot, use that as part of a scientific article (likely a "Collective Work" - https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Common_licence_interpretations) and send that to a publisher there might come a problem: Publishers may require either transferal/waive of copyright or a CC BY license - neither of these options seems to work with the OSM license, AFAIU.

Would there be any possible way out?

First of all, note that you link to a page describing their old (pre-2012) license. They have updated Legal FAQ and License and Legal FAQ pages now. Furthermore, they have a bunch of examples on how their data has been used in research already (though a lot of them seem to be various theses). See also this question on OpenStreetMap's help forums.

The main point is that their data, and their maps, fall under their license. If you include them in  a paper, they request proper attribution. If you do that, I don't see it as being different from reusing a previously published figure with permission, which would be a reproduction of the figure, without transfer of copyright. Maybe specific journals/publishers would have a policy against this, but in my experience most should be fine with it, as it's standard academic practice.


Uploading potentially copyrighted material onto Academia.edu On Academia.edu, a user uploaded a Translation Database of Sun Tzu's Art of War, which includes translations as recent as 2020. Alongside it was a Bibliography Document that references all works shown in the former. I’d like to upload a similar document that shows Translations of Laozi’s Tao Te Ching, however I don’t know if this would violate any copyright protection held by the Authors/Publishers.
This site here, presents many translations, some entries consisting of an authors’ text verbatim whereas others either link to a pdf or to a wayback machine page. Seeing as it’s still operating, I’m assuming that TAO hasn’t violated any copyright protection, I’m wondering whether I could include translations appearing in TAO without violating copyright protection. I recognise that for some translations, in the case of Beck
or Muller,  I would need to seek permission in order to include them in the database, however would I need to do this for all translations that are not in public domain?

Laozi's work is not protected by copyright, you are free to provide translations. You cannot freely distribute translations of others.

This site here, presents many translations...Seeing as it’s still operating, I’m assuming that [the site] hasn’t violated any copyright protection

Your assumption is false: The absence of a take-down or prosecution doesn't imply an absence of copyright violation.


Conference paper rejected after positive review and TPC comments I submitted a paper to an IEEE conference, and this paper was rejected despite of almost all of the reviewers’ comments being positive. In particular, all three of the reviewers recommend to weak accept the paper, and even the TPC chair recommend to weak accept it. However, the paper has been rejected.

Due to this weirdness, I asked for the chair’s motivations for this decision, and he answered

  Your paper didn’t make the conference capacity line. Please resubmit to another venue.

What does this mean? What is the conference capacity line? Does that mean that there were not enough slots, or something else?

I have never encountered this kind of situation before.

3 reviewers recommended "weak accept," as did the chair, but the paper was rejected.

This is a common situation. Other papers probably got better reviews or your paper was perceived negatively during the discussion phase or ...

  I asked the chair why and he said "your paper didn't make the conference capacity line. Please resubmit to another venue."

Conferences have upper-bounds on the number of papers they can accept due to time constraints.


Giving a test lecture, what should I keep in mind? I hold a PhD in computer science. I've been travelling to conferences presenting my papers and sometimes as part of my teaching assistance duty, I had to give some very simple lectures to students.

I found a position as professor and researcher in a university, and I've been asked to deliver a "test lecture" on a subject I don't know to students from a different background than mine. There will be a body of professors evaluating my teaching skills as well.

I am in the process of preparing the lecture, and realised I am preparing it as a presentation. I was wondering, what should I keep in mind when preparing the lecture? I am used to present in front of (a lot of) people, so that is not a problem. I am also used to prepare presentations for my work, so I was wondering if there is something I should keep in mind while preparing/delivering a lecture which is different from delivering a presentation.

Thank you!

Off the top of my head, things that are different about a lecture rather than a presentation:

You're not simply relating stuff you did to your peers : You're teaching people who know less about the topic than you do (even if you only know what you got from the textbook when preparing!). So think carefully about the intended audience, and how to explain the concepts at the right level. This will take time. Fortunately...
You have time. You have an hour or more rather than (say) 15 minutes. This means you need to convey less content per minute, and you can spend more time building understanding step by step. Try to think about helping your students to develop a mental model that they can fit the new concepts into, rather than just telling them facts.
Because the students are having to assimilate completely new concepts, don't overcomplicate - keep the necessary cognitive load to a minimum by omitting unnecessary details. Don't lie to them, but it's OK to say, for example, "this is a simplification, but it's a useful way to think about it at this level. We'll come back to it in more detail later.".
Because you have more time, you'll also need to think more about (and spend more time on) structure. Think about pacing - don't talk for an hour. Instead, especially if you have a relatively small class, try to get some discussion going, or set an exercise. This may not be applicable for a demo lecture during recruitment, though.

If you have a small group (<25 or so, as may happen for postgrad courses) then it's more like a lesson than a lecture and things can be far more interactive.


How to inform a student about my appreciation of his/her original solutions In the final exam of a course, a student has solved some problems in a really ingenious way.
He gets perfect score anyway.
What is the appropriate way to inform him about my appreciation of his solutions?
(Also what if I don't have the occasion to meet him again?)

Just write the student an email and express your appreciation. Don't overthink this. Then again, don't go over the top ("you are the best student I ever had") - you never know how he will take this.

Depending on how well you know the student and on whether you would actually be willing to do so, inform him that you would be happy to write a glowing recommendation for him if he ever needs one, e.g., for admission to grad school.

And as Compass comments, think about how you can help the student develop even further. Do you have any follow-up courses, maybe even advanced ones that the student would usually not take but that you think he would be able to follow? Tell him. Can you give him a research project? Take him on as an Research or Teaching Assistant?

At some point, this turns from "helping the student grow" to "nurturing your own future grad student", and that's OK. This is a mutually beneficial thing, after all. And it's never too early to snap up the promising students. If you don't do it, others will.


In teaching, what do we actually mean when we say "syllabus completed"? In my university, every faculty member has to submit a handout at the semester beginning for his(her) course. The handout is basically a list of topics (a syllabus) that needs to be taught to the (to be)registered students. The examination questions must also focus on the topics from the submitted handout.

At the end of the semester, many a time I have been a part of the informal discussions related to the topic "How much syllabus have we completed at the end?"

I do not only find this discussion illogical but also very strange. I believe that the completion of the syllabus depends on

The registered student group (their individual effort in the course, their own standard, capability, intelligence etc.)
The intention of the teacher (how much depth is (s)he reaching into during the teaching, assignments, projects etc.)

My university and administration often ask this question formally to the students (during their teaching feedback) as well as to the faculty members during the annual appraisal.

I have the following questions and I seek some advice on this aspect.

Does it make sense to just say that syllabus is completed in which students get almost nothing?
Is it not worth teaching some small amount but in an optimal way so that the students would get the true knowledge from the course and could apply whatever they learned?
What do we actually mean by the term "syllabus completed" -- Do we mean "students learned everything that we taught" or "we taught everything, but don't care about students learning"?

Inputs:

I am not considering the extreme classes of the students i.e. genius guys and the dull guys.
I discussed informally with one of the professors involved with teaching administration, but the discussion was inconclusive.

This sounds a lot like a "rantion". :) I'll try an answer, but most of what I writing is a truism.

  Does it make sense to just say that syllabus is completed in which students get almost nothing?

There are two different questions: was everything that was on the syllabus covered in the class? and were the lectures helpful and sufficient to learn the required material?. Both should be asked to the students. They should not be mixed up.

  Is it not worth teaching some small amount but in an optimal way so that the students would get the true knowledge from the course and could apply whatever they learned?

Clearly, there is a balance to be found between amount of material covered and depth/effectiveness of the lectures. For each course there are different reasonable balance points, and it's the job of a competent teacher to find one of them.

  What do we actually mean by the term "syllabus completed" -- Do we mean "students learned everything that we taught" or "we taught everything, but don't care about students learning"?

The second. The first one is a separate question, equally important (see above).


Updating my CV post-Academia ( UK ) I've got a pretty awesome CV (I think), through hours of trailing through websites and reading tips. However that was back when I'd just finished University and now it needs updating!

I'm 25 and I am into my 3rd job since university and so have quite a bit of experience about these roles.

I have a few questions.

It seems my job experience now out weighs my education. Should I move my Work Experience to page one and my education to page two?
Do I still need my GCSE's on my CV? They don't seem very relevant.
How much detail about my education do I actually need?
Do people still care what A levels I did?
Do people want to know my dissertaiton title and what key subject I learnt, or is my degree title now enough.
Moving onto my work experience. I have had two jobs that are really relevant to what I'm aiming at and the third is less so. What is the minimum I should put for the third job, it's title?

Let's hope someone can help, everything I normally find is for new graduates CV's, bless them but I need some help too!

EDIT
Looking for UK or European answers, the US is too crazy. I don't have a GDP ;-)

To answer some of your questions:

While there's no set guideline, education often comes first. You should include the university where you earned your BS/BA (list major, GPA, and any honors), masters university (field, GPA, and thesis title if applicable), and doctorate university (field, GPA, thesis title). High school and similar degrees (including A-levels) should not be listed. Note that a brief (one to three sentence) explanation of your masters and thesis work may be useful here; most people in industry won't have any idea what "Detailed Sprockification of Remonstrantized Grommits in Hypernormalized Framistans" means, so a short layperson description will show (1) that you can communicate and (2) that you did cool stuff that they can understand.
Work experience should include company, position title, responsibilities. You can summarize responsibilities in bullet points or short (two to three sentence) paragraphs, it makes no difference either way.

To answer some things you left out:

Strongly consider adding an Objective Statement to the beginning of your resume. It should summarize your career goals in a sentence. Check out this website which I found on Google for some discussion of what this is.
Include publications, teaching experience, grants awarded, trainees mentored, and notable community service (awards received, board memberships, etc).


What are the most valuable skills to learn to be considered for a quantum optics PhD position? I have a master degree in thin-films interferometry, and I want to receive a Ph.D position in the area of Quantum optics. How can I assure receiving this position? What are the required skills or certificates to be accepted?

You can get a PhD position without specific knowledge of the research area.  For quantum optics, commonly desired skills include:

English language skills
Advanced mathematical skills, including statistics
Broad education in physics
Experience conducting research

You do not need a "certificate."  You will need a masters degree (which can substitute for a bachelors degree in countries that require a bachelors degree).


Publishing a review of another person's proof For a Graduate level math course one of our assignments was to prepare a lecture on a topic to give to the rest of the class.

My topic was to present a result that had been discovered some years ago as it would compliment some of the material from class. I wrote up a small paper on the topic to help prepare me for the lecture.

I think it would be useful to publish because there are only two places I know of where the proof can be found: the original proof is in a Swedish mathematics journal, and the other is in a physics textbook and lacks a certain amount of rigour or intuition.

My lecture followed the textbook's presentation and I added to the proof some rigour, and some intuition behind the steps of the proof. However, I didn't really add anything to the result, just explanations and flushing out omitted details.

Would it be considered plagiarism if I were to publish a review of their proof on a website like Arxiv? I don't think the review is important enough to be put in a real journal, but I do think that some people might find the explainations useful.

Another thing to note is that this would be my first "publication", could it hurt my future academic prospects? Thanks for the advice!

If you overtly title your piece something like "explication of X's proof of Y", and give the citation, (and do not literally copy verbatim swaths of their article) this is a completely fine thing to do. Or give it a more explanatory title, and in the text immediately say that you are simply expanding or elaborating on the proof in the original source(s).

It will absolutely not hurt your future, because the people who are "strict" about what "publication" supposedly means will ignore anything that appears only on arXiv, because, in their minds, it was not "published" at all, anyway. And, to many people, taking the trouble to digest an important thing and re-tell it for the benefit of others is a wholesome activity.


How do teaching buy outs work? Normally a professor is paid for eight to nine months each academic year for teaching several courses in the period. However, if a professor gets a research grant, he can support himself by the grant in the summer months, or teach fewer courses.

I'd like to know how it works exactly. Let's say, if a professor only teaches half of the normal load of courses, then he will receive half of his normal salary from the department and the rest is covered by the grant, right? If the grant is large enough, can he choose not to teach any course without loss of pay?

Nearly every school will have a different policy on buying out of teaching.

In the US, many universities have a breakdown of the position's time. For example, you may be hired to do 60% research, 20% teaching, 20% service. At some universities, this means the grants must cover the percentage of your salary that you are buying out of. At others, there is a flat buyout price (presumably the amount it costs to pay an instructor). Although, some also have requirements for a minimum number of courses you must teach per year (can't buy out).

You can also get a reduced teaching load through additional service (e.g, serving as graduate coordinator or department chair).


"Editor invited" to "Decision in Process" I submitted my paper to World Scientific journal for a week ago. The "Editor invited" status stayed since the submission, and then it changed to "Decision in Process" directly. It seems strange. Normally “editor invited” comes after manuscript screening. Why was there no "with editor" status and why did it change to "Decision in Process"?

It means they're making a decision without peer review. Usually not a good sign; a desk rejection is very likely.

If you're asking why "with editor" didn't show up, there's a good chance it did, but the editor made a decision in a few minutes and you didn't notice it.


What is the non-European perception of Marie-Curie postdoctoral fellowships? I recently posted the above question along with another in the same post and was asked to post this one separately.

I have received a Marie-Curie individual fellowship from the European Commission. As a non-European, this allows me to take up research in a Member State. I know this fellowship is prestigious in Europe, but I'm not sure how it's perceived in other parts of the world like the USA, Canada, Australia...etc. Any idea on this?

Speaking as a researcher in the USA, I would say that Marie Skłodowska-Curie Actions are clearly perceived as having significant prestige.
Even not knowing all of the details, one immediately sees:

It's an EU-wide program, and those generally have high competition.
Curie remains widely famous, and nations and organizations are protective of her name.

Exactly how prestigious it is compared to other prestigious fellowships I wouldn't care to speculate, but it's clearly a noteworthy addition to any researcher's CV.