ArXIV's Different Licenses I am considering submitting a working paper to the ArXIV archive and was wondering what the different licenses entailed, and whether choosing one might have some future ramifications.

Thank you!

I suggest you post to the ArXiv only after you have an idea of a group of journals to which you will be submitting.  For example, narrowed to economics, or narrowed to physics.  Then you can investigate  a few journals and be sure you have a few places where you can submit after posting to the ArXiv, and with a certain licence.

If I am writing a pure math paper, I just post with what the ArXiv calls the minimal licence, which I have never read. I have never had any pure math journal even ask what licence I picked for the ArXiv.  I hear the New England Journal of Medicine does not publish anything that was on the ArXiv.  The PNAS states "the license selected for a preprint will affect the sharing, adaptation, and reuse of material" so for that level of publication some forethought is warranted.

Perhaps I have bad information and am spreading a rumor.  The point is that nobody can advise you on a licence that will work for every academic journal in the world.  You need to have that narrowed down.  For some journals no option works.  For many, many journals, it probably does not matter.  If you have decided on a basic type of journal you can post here again with a much more specific question.


How much detail about mental health issues should one include in "Special Circumstances" section of graduate school applications? This question is inspired by answers and comments to the question "Should a postdoc talk about his depression with his mentor?" on this website.

Suppose that an applicant to a graduate program suffered from some mental health issues during the completion of his previous degrees, and that this situation had a noticeable impact on his academic performance (for example, significantly lower grades or part-time status for one or several semesters).

Most graduate school applications have sections dedicated to providing explanations for such special circumstances, and it is of course strongly recommended that any applicant with unusual drops in academic performance should mention something about this in the special circumstances section. Otherwise, the admission committee will be left to guess what might have happened, which is likely to decrease the odds of being admitted (indeed, it seems a consensus that the more tangible information an admission committee has about an applicant, the more confident they can be about the fact that admitting him will be a sound investment).

Many answers/comments to the question "Should a postdoc talk about his depression with his mentor?" seem to recommend being very careful about revealing details on one's mental health conditions, given that there is still a lot of stigma attached to mental health conditions. However, in the case of PhD applications, not mentioning anything is not an option.

This then leads to the following question: If not making any mention of health issues is not an option (such as in PhD applications), how much details should one go into? To avoid stereotyping associated to any particular disease (such as depression=unreliable, learning disability=not smart) one could limit the description to "health problem", but could this lack of details be seen as suspicious and/or still a situation where the admissions committee will have to do guesswork?

You do not have to disclose your personal health history (including mental health) to graduate schools  when you are applying -- and even while you are enrolled.

There are occasions where you may want to. For example, if there is a semester in your undergraduate record where you did particularly poorly because of (mental) health issues, you may want to note this is in your diversity statement or special circumstances portion. However, you can be as vague as you want -- saying "In the fall of my junior year, my health declined which led to poor performance in a number of my classes. I recovered the next semester and you can see that my senior year grades were all of the highest rank."

If you have faculty writing letters of recommendation for you who know about this incident, you may want to tell them: 1) if you want them to mention it or not; 2) what language to use ("she became depressed following a family death" vs. "She struggled with the additional family issues following the death of her mother" vs. "There was a family crisis that took her away from school that semester", etc.etc.).

Otherwise, your (mental) health record  is your personal medical information. The professors in your department do not need to know it -- any more than they would need to know that you had HIV or were on dialysis. If you need accommodation (such as taking Wed and Fri off for dialysis, or for therapy) you may want to disclose that to some people but you should feel free to compartmentalize the information to certain people and to not disclose everything about your condition.

For example, it is entirely appropriate to tell just your advisor, department chair or director of graduate studies -- or external to the department: your university ombudsperson, disability services officers, or associate provost or dean -- some of the details of your condition and what accommodations you need to be a successful scholar, but ask that the information not be shared with faculty members in the department.  But again, this is your choice.


3 3-hour exams in a row with no time in between. What can I do? I am currently studying computer science in a University in Canada.

I have just received my Schedule for the semester, and I have noticed that, during the finals week, 3 of my 6 courses put their final exams in the same day.

Specifically, I have an exam from 12:30 to 15:20, another one from 15:30 to 18:20 and the last one is from 18:30 to 21:20. All three of those exams are Worth 35% or more of my grade, therefore are very likely to be decisive in my success or failure this semester.

This really seems unreasonable to me. I do not expect, no matter how much sleep I get and how much coffee I drink, to be able to perform at my best for 9 hours straight, without even a chance to eat dinner.

So I have two questions:
First, is this standard practice? I'm only starting my second semester, so maybe I just got Lucky the first time that all my exams were the only one of the day.

And Second, if this is not standard but rather a very unlucky setup, do I have any recourse? Is it rude to ask some of the professors or higher-ups in the school to change the Schedule a little?

It is also important to know that I am taking the classes in the standard path (? I am not a native English speaker, but I am referring to the grid thing telling me the recommended courses to take every semester in order to complete the program in the fewest number of semesters) for my program. I am not taking any special classes that are not expected to be taken at the same time. This means that a lot of people probably have this exact Schedule for this semester, and it's not just me because I made weird choices.

EDIT: Thank you all for your input. I will accept one of the answers now, but to be honest, they were all pretty enlightening. I had already sent an email to all concerned professors AND the faculty 5 days prior to asking this question, and I still haven't received an answer. I will probably forward the same email (it is as polite as possible, asking about what are my options in the context, etc) to some more administration adresses in the hopes that someone can give me the exact policy, or at least tell me who can.

I am very glad that everyone seems to agree that they can usually do something about it, this makes me less stressed. In the worst case, nothing changes, and as one answer mentioned, if lots of students have a worse grade because of this setup, then the playing field is even.

Whether this is a standard practice or not highly depends on your university. However, the attribution of these exam period is an automated process and some situations like yours are bound to happen.

If I were you, I would consult the specific rules of your University. I know at that my previous Canadian University in Montreal (École Polytechnique), there was a rule that limited the amount of exam hours you could have in a 24 hours period, ( I believe it was 6 maximum per day). If such a thing occurred, you could ask for the exam to be moved as this was judged to be unfair.

You can also consult with your student committee (of your department or your faculty) and your department since you say that you are following a standard path. In that case, there will be many students in the same situation and they should prove to be understanding. The student committee can usually present a uniform front and defend the entire class as a whole concerning this issue. There is absolutely nothing impolite about this if you proceed politely and you act as soon as the semester begins. The sooner you handle this issue, the easier it will be to solve.

I believe you are right in saying that this will not allow you to perform to your full potential, and you are right to ask for a more humane schedule.


What to report as impact factor for a journal that had one the year I submitted my manuscript, but not in the year of publication? I had submitted a paper in a journal whose impact factor was .78 according to Thompson Reuters citation reports in 2013. My paper got accepted in that journal and was published in 2014. The journal did not receive any impact factor for the year 2014. Sometimes I have to mention the impact factor of my papers with them but I do not know how to find the impact factor for this particular journal (It had impact factor when I submitted but when published it did not receive any impact factor). Please guide me what impact factor should I use for my above mentioned paper.

I have same question for change in the impact factor of a journal from submission time to publication time. Thank you.

Quick answer: the safest is to give the IF followed by the closest year of estimation: IF 3.5 (2013). The wisest is to understand why the journal does not have an IF for 2014: did it change its name, was it withdrawn from the JCR (journal citation report)?

Impact factors for one year can be available after a few months.  You can mention other sources like Scimago, that may have other figures (eigenfactor, etc).


What to do when you find out your research result is wrong because it's based on wrong methods/results, after years of works? This is not my current situation. However I've heard similar stories from different people (along with my own past experience) a few times. Therefore I want to ask a general question(the title).

For example, suppose you're a graduate student in one of the following scenarios

You believe you prove a theorem but later find out it's wrong because one of the lemma/theorem you cite from another published paper is wrong.
You spend long time setting up experiments and finding out an published experiment result is not reproducible and is likely to be wrong.
You rely on co-workers' code to run simulations but it turns out that there are errors in the code that makes the simulation inaccurate, therefore the conclusion based on that is wrong.

and let's further assume you find out those problems when it's closed to advancement or dissertation time of graduate study. You've spent a few years, only to get a faulty result that is not likely to advance you to the next stage of a researcher.

Q. Are these scenarios hopeless (i.e. a student in that scenario must terminate graduate study)? Should the student be the only one responsible for the issue?

If not, what's the best thing one can do in those scenarios?

If so, how to prevent them? (You can still answer this question even if your answer to Q. is no.)

Highly appreciated if anyone can discuss this from either student's or advisor's point of view.

One thing to consider is that showing fault in an "established" result is, in itself, an important result. If a student spent years working on a project, only to find that the results from their new work disprove earlier accepted results, that's worth telling other researchers (i.e. publishable). Especially considering there's probably dozens of other graduate students all working off those same results until someone tells them the results are not reliable. In fact, my father, an emeritus professor of mathematics, lists "counter-examples" as one of his areas of research.

In the case of proofs and lemmas (i.e. case 1), this is clearly publishable. In the case of experiments, it's a little harder: you would need to make a strong case for your new experiment being substantial evidence that the previous results were wrong, rather than you just botched your experiment. But if you can make a solid case, it is well worth publishing.

Sadly, the third case is not so good for the student. Assuming the student's colleague has not published yet, the research community does not benefit much from the student saying "hey I just realized my friend messed up". They should still tell their colleague and advisor so that the situation is communicated.


If an IRB approved a study, does it need to be mentioned in the papers that results from the study? An institutional review board (IRB) approved a study. I wrote a paper reporting results from the study. Do I need to mention in the paper that an IRB approved this study?

It depends on the journal. For example, the Journal of Multicultural Counseling and Development instructions for authors state:

  appropriate institutional review board (IRB) review and approval should accompany all studies involving human
  participants or research material derived from human participants. This information should be clearly stated in
  the Method section of the manuscript. In addition, the manner in which informed consent was obtained from
  the study participants (i.e., oral, written, online/electronic) should also be stated in the Method section. If the
  study was exempted from IRB approval, that information should be indicated in the Method section. Failure
  to provide this information in the manuscript may result in the manuscript being returned without review.

Nature takes a different approach and does not require the IRB approval to be mentioned in the text (and may not even allow it), but does provide a checklist, that the author must complete and is provide to reviewers, that deals with IRB approval.


Is it right to use 'X is a new research topic of interest to our lab' to indicate that the lab has not done research on 'X'? Is it right to use 'X is a new research topic of interest to our lab' to say that the lab has not done research on X before?

I want to convey:

1.The lab only focused on  research topic 'Y'(e.g. proteins) in the past. In the future, 'Y' will still be the focus, even though 'X' will be the secondary focus.

2.The lab lacked established biological experimental conditions for conducting research on topic 'X' (e.g. miRNA) two years ago, since topic X belongs to different field. I was the first student to conduct research on topic X.

I am a student, not the PI. I want to describe the experimental conditions when I began the project in PS for PhD application. I started from scratch and encountered many difficulties.

(I hope my edits would make the problem more clear, thank you! )

Besides, Is there a more polite way to say 'our lab'?  I mean the lab I belong to.

I have angst about writing this answer. When you say our lab, it potentially sounds like you are speaking for the lab in an official context and taking an ownership stake in the lab. Depending on your role, I am not sure you can talk about the lab as being yours. I am also not sure you cannot, and hence the angst.

As a PI of a lab, I have research interests that the lab has never followed through on due to a variety of reasons including a lack of funding and expertise. I would be a little upset if a student/post doc implied the lab was not interested in a topic just because the lab didn't have the expertise or equipment to do any research on the topic. Similarly, I would be a little upset if a student post doc implied that their personal interest automatically becomes an interest of the lab.


How to engage interdisciplinary professors in forming an MS thesis committee and project? I am sort of stuck in a quagmire. I am just starting out in a 2 yr bio-manufacturing program, which has a thesis component. I was looking to add a minor from an interdisciplinary department biotechnology, which requires a few classes and a person from this area must serve on my thesis committee. My problem arises from the fact that I want my thesis topic to leverage skills from both groups. As of now the projects offered to me are not really all that exciting and would not be as multifaceted as I would like.

I know part of the problem is that I am a masters student, so that limits the scope of what I can do which is a turn off for some. In my initial outreach to professors for the minor component, a common response was I do not have anything for MS students.

The other issue is that since both areas are interdisciplinary, each area is made up of individuals from a number of departments (engineering, microbiology, biology, plant science, animal science, genetics). The dual appointment makes things  a challenge. I wanted to ask out there if anyone else needed to do more leg work to form a committee and secure a project.

What are some pitfall I could avoid?
What is the best way to engage professor who have no real vested interest?
Is it possible to generate a fusion project leverages skills from both programs?

I sometimes have the stinking suspicion that "interdisciplinary" is a codeword for "disorganized, incoherent, or train wreck". What you're encountering is precisely the problem man such programs face, there's no central management of what you are working towards or way to corral the cats into working with you.

My suggestion is to save the interdisciplinary until you've mastered one discipline. Otherwise, expect more of the same -- having to convince everyone to be on board and losing focus on a current research topic.

Right now, you're an MS student -- focus on finishing that degree first. If you want to develop research skills outside of that, then take the courses without adding a "minor" to your MS. If after you finish, you want to pursue a PhD that bridges some of the knowledge fields you are working in, make sure that the place you go has a coherent program for bridging them rather than a dream that they can be bridged.


Should I refuse the invitation to review a paper which I recommended for rejection? What should I do if I suspected who wrote this paper? 1) I have been invited to review the revision of a paper that I recommended for rejection. I cannot see the updated paper before accepting or declining this second reviewing invitation.
Would it be ethical to review it a second time if I advised it to be rejected and the editor overrode my recommendation?

2) Time has elapsed, and now I am almost sure of knowing at least one of the potential authors of this paper (Double-blinded review). It turns out that I might have a conflict of interest with this person. So my first ethical instinct is to decline the revision of this paper because of this alone.

Any comments much appreciated, thank you.

It's fine to review a paper that you have previously recommended for rejection (assuming you gave reasons rather than just dismissed it). The editor took your comments into consideration when deciding to seek a revision and I would expect the authors to respond to your concerns in their revision.

However, the second question is definitely grounds for refusing. The editor may wish to include you because you raised concerns and are in the best position to assess the extent to which those concerns have been addressed, and you may be incorrect in your authorship guess.

What you could do is an email to the editor along the lines of "Since providing the previous review, I have come to believe that PERSON X is one of the authors and I have a conflict of interest if that is true. Unfortunately, I must therefore decline to review unless you can assure me that PERSON X is not one of the authors."


To what extent may someone use the content of a published paper in an expository piece on that paper? If someone s has a paper p published, and if s wants to write up a piece explaining the contents of p, then to what extent can s use the contents of p? Or, the person s has no right to mention the contents of p?

That is, if someone writes an article explaining the ideas in one of his published paper by rephrasing the published paper, then to what extent is such rephrasing legitimate?

From an ethical point of view, you must cite your original source appropriately. Clearly indicate

when you are using ideas, words, or figures from another work by citing the source
when you use something verbatim (typically by putting it in quotation marks or blockquotes)

As long as you attribute your sources properly, there isn't really an ethical problem with excessive use of a source.

From a legal perspective, it can be trickier. In summary,

Copying large amounts of text verbatim: may violate copyright
Copying small amounts of text verbatim, for academic purposes: typically allowed under fair use, though like everything legal, this varies by jurisdiction
Paraphrasing text: does not violate copyright. The intellectual content of a paper is not subject to copyright (as opposed to the words used to present it, which are).
Reusing figures: may violate copyright. Check the policy of the source's publisher.

From a "best practices" standpoint, work that involves an excessive amount of paraphrasing is often lacking original intellectual content. Even if your work is expository, you're supposed to be adding some value for the reader, not just stating the content of the original source in other words. So be careful of this, too :)


Who decides authorship order? I completed my Ph.D. a few months ago, but it was 4 years of a living hell. My PI was super abusive, I had severe depression and when I said I wanted to defend (6 months earlier than the deadline) because I couldn't bear it any longer she said: "you will only defend if I want you to".
Anyway, I spent a year abroad, funded by an agency, and when I came back with the data she said it as bad work and unpublishable. I still wrote a manuscript (after the Ph.D. ended and I no longer had funding) draft without any participation from her and any result coming primarily from her lab. I recently shared it with the authors and she is taking it as if it was her work, sharing with random people and claiming she is senior author, which I don't agree since she didn't contribute at all (not even with experiments planning).
My question is: do I have a saying on the authorship order? I feel like it's my work and I should be able to decide that, especially after everything she put me through.

The answer of JeffE is the morally correct one. The answer of ZeroTheHero is the political one.

I'll give the self defense answer. If your advisor has power over your future, then I advise you to go along. But move away from her orbit at your first opportunity. What she is demanding is unethical and seems to be trying to boost herself at your expense, rather than supporting a former student as she could.

But if that power is there, and she has a grudge, then she can use that power to affect your future. You probably don't have any countering power to contest it, though some do.

The order of authorship, I'll add, varies greatly by field. In some fields there are tremendous fights over it (lots of evidence in posts here). In other fields we just list contributors alphabetically, but they need to contribute. Some with very minor contributions show up in acknowledgements, but not as authors. My advisor (mathematics) helped me a lot and did, in fact, contribute to my dissertation, but no one would have thought he should be co-author. But he was acknowledged and cited.

In other labs, the PI is always listed (often last) and people make different assumptions about that. Some have said they always assume the last author did all the work. Others assume the last author provided funding and encouragement, nothing else.

But, in your case, think long term about your career and protect it. This paper may wind up with, to you, an unhappy listing of authors, but it won't be your last work, nor, one hopes, your best. If you need to submit to protect yourself, then do so, but, as I said, move away quickly. Don't look back. Find a better circle of collaborators.


Should I write "we" or "I" in my research statement? I am currently in the process of applying for tenure-track assistant professor jobs.
I was wondering whether I should write "we" or "I" in my research statement.
While it is true that I did not do all the research on my own,
I have heard that in a research statement,
I am trying to sell my research agenda
and thus should use "I" rather than "we".
Nevertheless, I get an odd feeling as if I am taking all the credit for something that was done with other researchers.

A research statement is a mix of past and future.

When you are talking about the past, you should be honest about the fact that you are not working in isolation---in fact, that is a good thing.  Use "we" or "my collaborators and I" or whatever most accurately describes what actually happened.

The other key part of a research statement, however, is your views about the future: what you think is important, what your ambitions are for the future, etc.  Those are unambiguously your own opinions, and should be "I" statements.


Should I post my PhD Thesis on arXiv, if I intend to make a paper based on it? I am interested in posting my math Ph.D. thesis on the arXiv, but I also plan on writing a shorter paper based on some of the results in my thesis.  I plan on posting this paper on the arXiv when I am finished.

Would this be appropriate?

I'll offer a counterpoint to the answers which advise against posting to arXiv.  I have posted my PhD thesis (in math) to arXiv, as well as the papers that I published from it.  I feel good about this decision and haven't had any problems, and I disagree with most of the objections that have been raised.

Here are some reasons why I think it can be advantageous to post:

Convenience of access.  Sure, my PhD university does have an online thesis repository that contains mine, but it isn't so easy to find and access.  I just tried, starting from a Google search, and it took me at least five minutes to get to the PDF (the first few hits all led me to an alternate paywalled repository).  You might like to try finding my thesis in this repository for yourself, starting from scratch, and see how long it takes you.  (Post your time in comments!)  As an added handicap, you don't know off the top of your head the name of the university; and my username below is my real name, but not my full name.   Then see how long it takes you to find it on arXiv.

Of course, the thesis is also on my professional website (well, the arXiv link is there), but we all know how those tend to move around and vanish.  It'd be worse if I had a common name.  So for the challenge, assume it isn't there.
Archival.  In 300 years, will my university's repository still exist?  I guess the data will still be around somewhere, but will it be in a location that people can readily find, and in a format that they can use? (Brain implant uploads?)  The university may not exist anymore; for that matter, the country where it was located may not exist anymore.  I have quite a bit more confidence that arXiv will survive into the future.  I'm not really arrogant enough to think that people will be clamoring to read my thesis in 300 years, nor even 3, but I wrote it as a permanent document and I'd like it to be one.
Updates.  In the arXiv version of my thesis, I've included an addendum correcting some errors and mentioning some additional citations that I've discovered since graduating.  I can't do that for the institutional repository version.

Some other remarks:

My thesis has a fair amount of additional expository material that isn't in the corresponding published papers, so I think there is some added value in having it available.  This might not apply if you have a "stapler" thesis.
I posted the thesis on arXiv some years after the papers were published (simply because I never thought of doing so until then), so there wasn't really any risk of it "overshadowing" the papers.  If you're concerned about that, you could also wait to arXiv the thesis.  In the short term, your professional web page should be a reasonably good way to find it.
My thesis didn't get flagged as having "overlap" with the papers, which are also on arXiv, although there is a lot of overlap.  Anyway, if it had, the fact that I posted the thesis later should mean that it would be the thesis that would have been flagged, not the papers; and I think people would understand why.
Coauthors: I agree that if your thesis contains joint work, that would be a reason to hesitate.  But I would downgrade Anonymous Mathematician's "really unfriendly" to "ask your coauthors for permission".  And make sure it is clear that the thesis contains joint work and that the coauthors are credited.  I would probably list them in the arXiv comments field, and maybe put an extra page at the start of the thesis PDF with the same info.
The thesis is less polished than a paper: True, but I also have on arXiv my undergraduate thesis and some lecture notes which are even less polished.  I guess it's more important to me to have these writings available, in case someone finds them useful, than to reserve arXiv for only my very best work.
arXiv has hosting costs: I don't really understand this objection, since the marginal costs of hosting one more document are surely extremely small.  But you can always make them a donation if you want to help defray those costs.  (Based on a quick back-of-the-envelope calculation, I estimate that a one-time gift of US $0.30 is sufficient to cover the storage and hosting costs in perpetuity.)


Citing literature review APA I am mentioning briefly research topic that has reached a general consensus and cite a literature review paper. I wonder which of the two ways below provides in terms of the best readability. I dislike both options and suspect I am missing the optimal option.

blabla.... a group of study has found strong association....

See Smith and Pitt (1999) for overview.
See (Smith and Pitt, 1999) for overview.
See ???? for overview

I am following APA standard but not literary so style improvements are more important.

The first form is more common in APA style format.

  See Smith and Pitt (1999) for overview.

Although I would be more picky in the use of 'see'. The word 'refer' would be used to point to a reference where a point is taken from or pointing to further readings. While 'see' is used to point to a reference that supports your claim (kindly refer this post).

Having said the above, both see and refer are used interchangeably in practice with the nuances not kept in mind.


Unwanted references in author proof By mistake, unwanted references are present in my accepted manuscript and I want to remove them from my author proof copy. Will the manuscript go to the editor once again or not?

At the author proof stage, you are expected to not make any more substantive changes.
Thus, if the copyeditors introduced these unwanted references, there is zero problem in asking for them to be removed.

If you realize that you messed up any put in things that you should not have or wish that you had not, however, it's a bit more iffy.  You can ask to have them removed and the journal staff will make a judgement call of whether it requires reconsideration or not.  If it's a simple mistake, don't worry about it.  If you were to try to remove all references to prior work, on the other hand, they would be right to consider that a serious substantive change and to strenuously object.

Bottom line: just explain why you want the references removed, and if it's reasonable don't worry about it.


Major review for the second time I submitted a research paper to a journal in March 2015. One a half month later I got back a major review from one reviewer and a minor from the other. Overall, it was classified as major revision.

It took me two months to inculcate all the suggested points and I re-submitted the improved version on the 3rd of July. The status immediately changed to under review. Since the original reviewer who suggested major revision could not review it this time, the services of a third reviewer were acquired. After four and half months (on 13th of November), I got back yet another major revision.

Is it normal to have a paper reviewed by another reviewer? And what can be the probable outcome? My colleagues were telling me that major review for the second time is very concerning.

It is difficult to see what other alternative the editor has; given that problems were identified in the paper by the original reviewer, the editor need to be confident that these have been adequately addressed, and a good journal should not base their decisions on the view of a single reviewer.  I'd say it is perfectly normal, and beneficial.

If the second reviewer has identified further shortcomings in your work, while that it perhaps not what you were hoping for, but in the long run I suspect they have done you a favour as it will strengthen the paper that is finally published.  I wouldn't be too concerned by this, just address the new set of criticisms as well as you can and resubmit.

What is not really acceptable is for a reviewer to give one set of comments, which you then address, and then for the same reviewer to give another set of criticisms about the revised version that they could have made in their original review.  However as this is a new reviewer, I don't think there is a real problem.


Relation between subscription fees and adminstrative costs Does anybody know what the ratio between subscription fees and the real article processing charges (so actual administrative costs) is? So in other words, how much money is made out of the subscription fees.

This will vary wildly by journal, and may be extremely difficult to even meaningfully define, given that many journals are "bundled" together in confidential and institution-specific contracts.  What is clear, however, is that:

Large for-profit publishers are very concerned with keeping their de facto subscription costs difficult to determine, and have quite high profit margins, and
The potential profit from open access subscription fees has drawn large numbers of predatory publishers to the field, and
Society publishers are often able to sustain journal publications with quite minimal costs, especially online-only journals.

You may draw your own conclusions from this: my conclusion is that a lot of money is made from subscription fees.


Math PhD Applications: Is it better to show just my good GRE score, or should I also send my low initial score? I am applying for mathematics PhD programs in the United States.

I did not major in mathematics as an undergrad and I did not do so well the first time around on the GRE Math subject test (about 60th percentile). I have since completed a Master's in mathematics and my score has improved to about 90th percentile.

I think it could benefit me to send both scores since it shows my progress. Will admissions committees in general view this in a positive light? Or should I just send my most recent good score.

Send your best one. GRE is typically used simply as a filter and including your lower score will probably hurt you more than it helps.


How to respond when rejected with encouragement to apply again, when hiring committee says position is always open? I received notification that I wasn't select for the final round, but they encourage me to apply next time when the application is open.

So I of course, out of curiosity ask when will be the next time.
I got the following reply

    Thanks for your reply,

  This position is always open.

  Best regards,

I m in shock, what this implicate and how should I respond?
Should I immediately resubmit the application? Or ask on how to proceed?
what would you do? What is appropriate to reply? Why would they have always open position? Isn't that weird?

This is indeed unusual.  For tenure-track positions at traditional universities in the US, a normal search proceeds on a specific timeline, from application deadline through interviews and leading up to the new hire's start date, usually the beginning of an academic year.  Once a position is filled, no further applications are accepted until there is a new opening and a sufficiently high administrator has given permission to begin a new search.

So in this normal situation, if you have been rejected, there is no point in reapplying until a new opening is posted, and typically that would be the next year at earliest.  (And there's no particular guarantee that the same department will have any openings at all the next year.)  So if you still want to apply to this employer, you have to wait a year; otherwise, consider it a loss and focus on other opportunities.

Given all this, the only way that this reply makes sense to me is if the university has a policy that applications will technically always be accepted.  That way if an extremely strong candidate decides to apply out of the blue, even if no opening currently exists, the university can consider creating a brand-new position just for them.  (For a major research university, "extremely strong" probably means something like "Nobel laureate".)  If you were such a candidate, you'd probably know.  But otherwise, this is of no practical value, and I suggest you continue to follow my previous advice and consider it a loss.  (And if you've already been rejected in one search, without even reaching the final round, then it seems clear they don't consider you "extremely strong", sorry to say.)

It's also possible that whoever replied to you is just confused.  In that case, too, I think you should fall back to the above and consider it a loss.

In either case there is not much point in responding to the message at all.

Also note that any phrase like "we encourage you to apply next time the position is open" should not be taken literally.  It's a mere courtesy which they surely write to everybody who is rejected.  It does not necessarily indicate that they really want to hire you.

Emory's suggestion of "apply once a week" is unwise, in my view.  This would be very annoying to the search committee, and make you look rather crazy.  It  would probably torpedo all hope of ever getting hired by that department.


How should I sign myself on poster if I am a student? I am preparing a scientific poster for a conference. Most researchers' posters have on the top of page header:
TITLE
FIRST+LAST
INSTITUTION

I am currently a bachelor student and this work is being created independently from my university. Should I write
TITLE
FIRST+LAST
UNIVERSITY NAME

or just
TITLE
FIRST+LAST

I suspect that any of them would be fine. Instead of an institution, it is also acceptable to describe yourself as "Independent Researcher" or the equivalent, depending on the venue. But listing the university could be taken as identification only.
There is an exception, of course. If you are doing something that the university would object to for some reason, then it is better not to name them unless you clarify, somehow, that you aren't suggesting they authorize or subscribe to what you have done. But even then, "Student at Moo U." is an accurate portrayal.


A professor who is less knowledgeable in certain subjects than a student What is a proper way of showing academic knowledge with assignments when your professors and or school is not on par with a particular students knowledge, so-to-speak?

A student is extremely smart but lacks communication skills due to a disability and is completing advanced work when it is not required. In return, the professors have become egotistical and grade his papers for made up biased issues which have been confirmed to be incorrect grading from other members of the field.

How might a student handle a situation such as this and yet still prosper and graduate with a network of potential workplaces when the professors cannot handle someone who knows more then they do and go after him to encourage failure?

If you have communication issues because of a disability, and it is interfering with your coursework, at least in the US, you would approach the office that handles disabilities.  They will work with you to get the disability officially documented, and then you will work with them to discuss appropriate accommodations with your coursework and your instructors.


Get DOI for publication in order to apply for a research grant, they ask me to provide a permanent identifier for my publications.
I have looked at such publications, but only the ISSN of such publications are provided.

Question 1: is an ISSN a permanent identifier?

Question 2: How can I get a DOI for those publications?

As others have noted, the difference between ISSN (International Standard Serial Number) and DOI (Digital Object Identifier) is that ISSN identifies a periodical publication (i.e. journal, conference proceedings) as a whole (i.e. it does not change between volumes or issues), while DOI identifies a single published work (i.e. article) from that periodical (more specifically, it also identifies a version of that work).

Most journals provide a DOI for their publications, even if it is not immeadeately obvious. Typically it's somewhere close to the top of the page while browser-viewing the article.

To obtain a DOI from a reference, take a look here. It seems to be an official service from Crossref that will search for a DOI based on a bibliography entry.

So, you just enter text in there (I tested the service by copy-pasting the first 7 bibliography items from the reference list of my latest publication), one reference per line, click "submit" and it will try and find a DOI for each entry. Out of the 7 references I submitted, it succeeded for 6, while the last one was a book and did not have a DOI.

Note that not finding a DOI through the suggested link still does not guarantee that a publication does not have a DOI (but some do not); in that case the next-best options are to check the journal website as well as how other papers cite the work in question.

Finally, it was suggested that posting a preprint of a paper on ResearchGate will allow you to generate a DOI for it. This is true, but with one caveat - as mentioned, the DOI identifies a single instance of an article, and therefore the DOI generated through ResearchGate will be linked specifically to a preprint (or "author's version"), and not the version of the work published by a journal or in conference proceedings.


Does university have any cultural mission? I am asking this question, as my previous question was closed because of being opinion-based. This made me wonder if there is a conceptual mission for higher education or not?

In most European countries, public universities receive the majority of their budget from the government, as higher education is somehow a public service, and responsibility of the government.

Imagine that all universities in Germany or Sweden decide to abandon any social activities of students. Sell all big campuses and buy modern buildings and only run the educational classes. Then, do the government, parliament, tax payers accept this policy? Is it the university's decision to make or universities have social and cultural responsibility for the society.

It was an exaggerated example, but my point is that:

Are universities simply business entities (even not for profit) to provide a service (which is educational courses) against the money they receive (from tuition or aid).

OR

They have social responsibility to make better citizens beside the professional training.

NOTE: I understand that an urban university may only offer education for a specific range of audience (for example students busy with jobs), but is it acceptable from the fundamental concepts of higher education that a university totally eliminate social activities by assuming that the main responsibility of a university is just providing high quality education.

Almost all universities have a larger mission than simply provision of educational courses.  For example, consider the mission statements of two very different publicly funded American institutions:

The University of Texas System, in addition to education, aims to develop ethics and morals, appreciation of arts and culture, and prepare "educated, productive citizens who can meet the rigorous challenges of an increasingly diverse society and an ever-changing global community"
Bunker Hill Community College is much closer to the "pure skills" model, but still also aims to provide community leadership and to ensure that "no eligible student shall be deprived of [education] because of an inability to pay tuition and fees."

In both cases, the university is explicitly aiming to promote social and cultural change towards a society in which most people would generally prefer to live (even though the particular goals of each are different).

Now, mission statements are one thing, reality is another.  Every university's leadership decides how it wants to interpret and/or modify its mission statement. Universities also generally have some sort of board overseeing it, which will attempt to guide and shape the university's actions.  This is where, especially with public universities, there is often a great deal of fighting about the university mission and policies around it.  For example, conservatives who are uncomfortable with the cultural broadening provided by universities often argue that a university should "just stick to teaching skills."  In general, however, the faculty and leadership of most universities tend to promote some sort of cultural mission, even if some are very different than most.


Why would a Ph.D. be awarded five years after attendance? I recently verified a degree, and the university reported that the degree was awarded five years after attendance. In other words, the student attended from 1995 to 1998 but the degree was not awarded until 2003, five years later. Why would there be a gap between the time the student attended and the time the Ph.D. was awarded?

(Note that the years above are fictitious and the actual years were at the time of the war in Vietnam so it is possible that some kind of military service may have been involved.)

In many universities, attendance (in the sense of registering for courses and/or paying tuition) is not required for Ph.D. students once they have completed the coursework and residency requirements for the Ph.D. After thus period, the Ph.D. student can work independently with minimal (or no) supervision from the Ph.D. advisor. When the Ph.D. thesis has been written, it is usually submitted to the advisor who does the first evaluation as to whether the research is of adequate quality, and then to the Ph.D. committee (examiners), the thesis defense is scheduled. After the defense has been successfully completed, the thesis (which often undergoes revision based on the Ph.D. committee's comments and questions that arose during the thesis defense) is submitted to the University and the degree granted at the next commencement/convocation etc.  During this last period that begins with the thesis being submitted to the Ph.D. advisor, the Ph.D. student might need to be registered at the university and possibly have to pay some tuition (usually not the entire fee for a full term), but this is usually not regarded as attending the university or listed as such on CVs and job applications.  In short,
it is quite possible to have a gap between the last date of attendance and the Ph.D. degree award date.


I want to do a PhD but I think I need more supervision. Should I be more direct in setting up more frequent meetings with my PhD supervisor? I began a paid position as PhD research assistant in Germany. Immediately after beginning the position, the principal investigator (PI) who hired me moved country and left the project (but remains part of the project as he secured funding). The ex-PI, new PI and I have meetings once a month to discuss progress, with little contact between these meetings.
I also enrolled on an associated PhD program and got assigned a PhD supervisor who is an expert in my area of study. I have monthly meetings with my PhD supervisor. There are therefore 3 people who are supervising my work, but it feels like I am without any supervision because these three people have overlapping and minimal roles. I am employed by a research institute and taking a PhD at an associated university. My supervisor and new PI are associated with the research institute.
I want to do a PhD but I feel like without any supervision I am in a post-doc like situation. I think I need more supervision/guidance mainly from my PhD supervisor, but it is not his role to discuss the work I am paid for, that should be the new PI.
Do you think I should be more direct in setting up more frequent meetings with my PhD supervisor?
Is anyone aware of how to best manage the paid positions that are quite separate from the PhD itself, and the multiple people involved?

If I understand it correctly, your funding comes from one source, but your doctoral studies are somewhat (at least) independent of that.
You need to satisfy your PI and others in your funding stream that your work is good, but since this isn't a permanent position, your primary focus should be on a productive relationship with your PhD supervisor.
So, yes, frequent meetings with the supervisor but without neglecting the others, unless you can find a different funding stream.
Focus, primarily, on long term goals. If the job in the lab supports that, all the better, but the degree is primary.


Are there any restrictions on applying to the same graduate school in two consecutive years? I have the following dilemma: I am finishing my Master's degree in pure mathematics this academic year (summer 2015) and I hoped to apply to a PhD program (US schools) starting from September 2015. Therefore, I have to apply this fall (till December 2014 in most places).

However, I have the following problem - my first article has just been completed and I have to go through a painful publication process which will not be finished in time (surely not till December). Second problem is that I have not particularly high GRE Math results (around 750 I guess, still waiting for results); the exam can be retaken only in April 2015.

Therefore, the only strengths I have are high GPA and solid letters of recommendation. I guess I could send the article to Arxiv.org, but I am not sure if that is acceptable to admissions committee and I am not familiar with the process of placing the article there.

So my questions are:

Is it OK to apply this fall and in case I am not accepted to the desired program, reapply next year, in the fall of 2015?

Or there is some kind of cooldown like the one you have in industry jobs and it is wiser to skip this year's admissions and apply in 2015 with a solid application profile?

A solid GPA and letters of recommendation is nothing to sneeze at—particularly if one of the people who wrote your letter of recommendation is a co-author on the publication.

You don't need to publish the paper on arXiv if you and your co-authors don't feel it is appropriate; however, you can mention that you have a manuscript available, and submit it along with your application (if the department to which you're applying permits it!).

However, I wouldn't wait an extra year just to "improve your odds." Apply this year—if you don't like the results, try again next year.


Lack of mathematical training for a CS Ph.D I've graduated and I'm looking to apply to a Ph.D. program in computer science. However, during my undergraduate years I did not take math courses other than the ones required for the CS major (i.e., discrete maths and algorithms). Thus I haven't taken a college course in calculus/statistics/linear algebra/probability, which I am aware is essential training for CS Ph.D. students. I also haven't taken an operating systems course since it wasn't required for the major and I opted for a different set of CS courses.

The reason for this was that I did not consider applying to graduate programs at the time, and chose to take courses in other unrelated departments to fulfill requirements for my second area of study. However, I am currently taking an online MOOC in calculus and linear algebra to increase my technical knowledge.

Although I have good grades in my CS courses and research experience, I'm wondering if this would be considered a red flag that I should address in my statement of purpose. If so, what would be a good way to do it?

Alternatively, would it make sense to apply for a Masters program to get more coursework under my belt before applying to a Ph.D. program?

Lack of mathematical training is a gap, but not what I would consider a red flag, if you have strength enough in other areas.  The key is whether I, evaluating your application, would think: "This person can't handle math" vs. "This person did other things besides math."

It is definitely a good thing that you are increasing your training: a MOOC will likely not make a big difference on paper, but if it's making a real difference for you intellectually, that matters too. Furthermore, a good mental mathematical tool-kit will make your life easier in many ways (including detecting when you shouldn't believe something just because it has math).

As for the question of whether to start with a Masters: that really depends on where you are and where you are trying to go.  For example, in the US, many Ph.D. programs literally or effectively start with a Masters, so it might be redundant (though the MOOCs or any other prep work will allow you to do less remedial work as part of it).  In Europe, on the other hand, most Ph.D. programs assume you already have a Masters, so it's pretty mandatory to start there.  Another thing that you might consider is to apply to both, starting with the Ph.D. if you get in, and burnishing your credentials in a Masters first if you don't.


How to get a research professor position? Since universities do not normally pay the salary of a research professor, and salary along with research funding comes from external resources, this not a paid position. On the other hand, a few people are interested in a job without a secured salary (or a few researchers are confident enough to get enough funding to secure their salary too).

As a result, universities do not advertise for hiring research professors (at least, I do not see in job websites). Therefore, it should be based on private negotiation. Logically, universities should not have limitation for the number of research professors, as they do not pay their salaries. If they can obtain fund, it is good for them, if not, the university loses nothing.

In the aforementioned circumstances, I guess, potential researchers should start this negotiation. If yes, how this negotiation is normally started? A potential research professor contacts the university President, Vice President for Research, Dean, Department Chair with a proposal?

What is the procedure for hiring a research professor?

The first thing to realize is that within the same department a tenure track/tenured position is usually more desirable than a soft money position (what you are calling a research professor). Soft money positions tend to have less responsibilities (e.g., teaching and service) but at many research oriented universities TT staff can use grant money to buy out of teaching and service. In fact those on soft money positions often pick up the residual work thereby making their grant money go further.

Also realize that most departments do not want lots of soft money staff. There are often physical space constraints. Soft money staff can potentially push a department in a direction it is not interested in which can lead to social and political issues. There is also the issue of graduate students. Most people on soft money positions want to have access to graduate students but this can syphon off students and funds from TT staff and provide less security for the students (e.g., when the soft money runs out).

Finally, realize that most departments actually care about their staff. When soft money positions have a gap in funding, the members of a department often try and cover the shortfall. The ability to attract the best soft money candidates depends on the past history of how soft money staff have been treated.

Now to answer you question, at the highest I would contact the Department Chair. No Department Chair wants to hear from the Dean that they should consider someone. No Dean has the time to read CVs of candidates that are not good enough for a TT position. Even better is to contact a TT staff member in the department that you would like to work with. the best soft money positions are ones in which the individual is not isolated from the rest of the department.


How to find research topics and publish more? I seem to be a bit stuck here. I am reading quite a lot, but I cannot find a topic to write about, which is original and which I could then publish as a paper. I am in the Humanities, so it's basically just about reading, reading, reading (so no research in a lab or something).

Are there strategies for this? What would you recommend a young scholar does to publish more and find interesting things to write about?

PS: I know that this question will not receive an entirely objective answer, but there might still be some proven strategies or insights that could alleviate some concerns.

You're thinking about this the wrong way; if do not have a topic you want to write about - then don't write.

I'm not being flippant: You should write and publish something if you feel it's important to express in writing and to disseminate. Don't try to produce publications for publication's sake.

But maybe it's the other way around: You're frustrated about being so passive - like you said, just "reading, reading, reading" - rather than producing something written. Well, in that case,  instead of thinking about what to write, think about what you want to know or figure out. What questions about human society (be it history, sociology, psychology or whatever you're focused on) intrigue you?

When you have your questions, you look for what's already been written or said. If it's sufficient - then you had an interesting read and can perhaps put the knowledge to some use; and if there isn't a definite answer to your question - that's what you can contemplate, explore, study, and eventually publish about yourself.

Edit: I gave a general answer, but your tags suggest you are in grad school. If that's the case, then also consider:

You have an advisor. Talk to him/her about this - that's what s/he's there for.
If you've submitted a research proposal, then you've asked yourself some of these research questions already. Are you actually looking into them? Do you have satisfying answers to them?


Insulting email from another graduate student I'm first year international graduate student in US and recently I have received an insulting email (for example including "be thankful and keep your mouth shut") from a domestic student who is my teammate in a class project. The email was a follow up to my debate with another teammate, however there wasn't any context for anything like that (I consider all of university email as public records and I'm careful about what I write), and initial conflict was going to be resolved with few email exchange. When I brought up the issue to the class professor, he (the student) claimed that he was angry because of my position in the debate and he was defending the other team member, but overall he (the student) defended his email. The professor tried to calm us down and avoid escalating the conflict.

I have experienced similar but milder situation with other domestic students and in one case a young professor as well. The general hostility pattern is that, they expect me to keep my mouth shut and be second class citizen. I have heard from other international students that our small city/university is not a good place regarding this issue. My question is, can I do anything about it?

I cannot give you advise on what to do in this situation as it depends strongly on the context, and you cannot give that information on an open forum like this.

However, I can make one comment: in general I would never try to solve such a conflict through email. Email is great, but when you sense that a conflict might start you immediately need to stop using email and try to speak with the person directly. Small misunderstandings that are easily resolved in face to face communication tend to get blown out of proportion very quickly in an email conversation.


Accidentally submitted to predatory journal, did not pay fee, already online? I am a first time researcher and naively submitted to an OA predatory journal (on BEALL'S LIST) which requests a publishing fee. Having read the terms and conditions, there was no comment stating that I needed to pay if accepted for publication and did state that i retained copyrights to my work. My work was accepted and they requested the publication fee but I have now found that my work is already on their website without the fee being paid or me signing anything. Is there anyway to retract my work without being penalised?

IANAL

It totally depends on your jurisdiction.
However, as pointed out by Solar Mike, they made an "invitatio ad offerendum" (like at the bakery, where they invite you to make an offer (i.e. want to buy) a bread or similar).
By submitting, you declared to make an offer and they accepted it and published it.
So they fulfilled their part of the contract and your part (payment) is still open.

You can still try to retract your paper by sending an email to the editor and maybe it's worth a gamble to not pay. Your institution should be able to help you with this question


How should a non-native English presenter respond to a question they did not understand? I'm not an English native speaker, and my question is, probably, only relevant for non-native speakers.

Sometimes, native speakers just don't care how easily the presenter can understand the question. Such a carelessness usually embarrasses the presenter enormously and makes him appear incompetent.

What is the proper way to behave for the non-native speaking presenter? Is it OK to ask for a repetition?

NOTE: I know, being a part of academic world requests some proper English knowledge. But you can hardly become as good as native speakers. And some native speakers have unusual dialects and use difficult expressions (sometimes, I bet, on purpose). I remember one speaker from Wales at a British conference. My God, that was Greek to me.

Yes, it is appropriate to ask the questioner to repeat the question, prefaced by:

  "I'm sorry but I didn't understand the question.  Can you repeat it or rephrase it?"

If you still don't understand it, you might ask someone else in the audience to restate it or rephrase it.

Some people at academic conferences are not good at asking clear, direct questions, even when they are native English speakers with normal dialect.  I have asked people to repeat or rephrase questions for this reason, and I am a native English speaker.


Writing letter of recommendation for someone I have never met I'm a first year PhD student. A student applying for an undergraduate institution in the US has asked me to write him a letter of recommendation. I wonder if a first year graduate student can write recommendation letters to high school graduates applying to US colleges.
This is not my main question though. That student has a connection to my family. I discussed physics with him once and I wasn't able to form any idea about his physics ability. What's worse, he wants me to recommend his friend who is also applying to US colleges, although I have never met or spoken with his friend at all. He wrote himself a recommendation (which I have to send as if it's I who had written it) that he had worked with me in the physics laboratory and that he was my strongest student. I wish to know how to proceed. I have two options:

refuse to write that letter

write that I have never met him.

I wonder how common is this.

You shouldn't write a letter of recommendation for someone you have spoken to once, and you certainly shouldn't write a letter of recommendation for a friend of some you have spoken to once.
You should never lie in a letter of recommendation, but it is generally also bad form to write negative things in a letter of recommendation. If you can't in good faith write good things about a candidate, you should refuse to send the letter.
EDIT:
I'll add an answer to your first (not main) question from the comments:
It is very unusual for a first year grad student to be asked to write a letter of recommendation, particularly since he is asking you to say he is your best student, when presumably you have no students. If I were the admissions tutor here, I'd probably disregard such a letter. Unless it was obviously dodgy (claiming things which were clearly untrue), in which case, it would count (heavily) against the candidate.


Good first-time study pre-registration website/service For my PhD thesis in artificial intelligence, I am designing a human study where subjects interact with multiple versions of an algorithm and rate their experience. I like the idea of pre-registering a study and want to try it out on this project.

Do you have any suggestions for a good pre-registration website/service? A collegue recommended https://aspredicted.org/, which I like for its simplicity - is it reputable? Are there any better? (I have struggled to find any that seem to be in use) First-hand experiences are very welcome and I hope they will benefit other readers of this site as well.

Looking around, it seems that there are a number of preregistration sites available, but they're not set up in the way you described.

A number of journals seem to have set up their own pre-registration processes, as described in the following two articles: [1] [2]
Some labs publish their own pre-registration papers (see these papers in the Harvard dataverse database).
Some fields are trying to set up pre-registration datasets specific to their field (e.g., political science), and they don't seem to be getting much traction
At least one other site seems to mirror AsPredicted.org in both scope and function: the Open Science Foundation Registered Reports site

All that said, though, it seems that pre-registration is still in its infancy. There are many articles discussing whether preregistration is a good idea at all ([3][4][5][6], as well as [1] and [2] from above), with some pointing out some very significant flaws with the concept. Additionally, while AsPredicted.org seems to be trying to do a good job, not all study paradigms can be encompassed within it's structure.

I fully recognize that your question is asking for a location where you can preregister, and that my answer is getting away from addressing that directly. That's intentional; given that (a) the concept is in its infancy, (b) the concept is nowhere near standard practice for any journal or field, and (c) it's unclear what role preregistration plays in peer-reviewed research anyways, my recommendation would be to simply follow your own lead and write down for yourself ahead of time the types of analysis you intend to perform, and use that as a guideline for yourself. Stated differently, even if you were able to put this sort of information in a centralized database (which doesn't currently exist), you would experience no more benefit than if you just wrote it down in a notebook and stored it in your office.


Is it considered normal to publish job offers inviting candidates to apply based on their gender and/or race in academia? I was browsing PhD position offers in Europe on different websites and I was quite surprised to find that several offers contained sentences such as

  University of X value equality and diversity. We strongly encourage women and BAME applicants for this position.

where BAME stands for Black, Asian and Minority Ethnicities; or

  The research group aims to increase the number of women in scientific positions. Female candidates are therefore encouraged to apply.

Is it considered normal in the academic environment to discriminate between  candidates according to their race and/or gender for "egalitarian" reasons?

How is the choice of a candidate based on their gender and/or race considered "egalitarian"?

These statements, in many variations are quite common. But they are not discriminatory, as you suggest (universities do not "discriminate against white males"). All the statement is saying -- and that is true in actual practice in the discussions of hiring committees -- is that women and other minorities are specifically encouraged to apply. This does not imply that they get special treatment or preference. It is simply a reaction to the fact (statistically proven by research) that women rarely apply for jobs that they do not perceive as a "perfect fit" whereas men do. So if a committee has a bunch of applicants where none is a perfect fit, more often than not a man is hired because there simply are not enough women in the pool.

See: Why Women Don’t Apply for Jobs Unless They’re 100% Qualified.

I do want to also comment on one of your comments while we're here. You state

  I think job offers should only focus on the candidate's skills regardless of his background and gender.

That is true, but how do you define "skills"? Let's use "qualification" instead. If you're, say, a typical math department where 50% of undergraduates are women, 35% of graduate students are women, but only 20% of tenure-track faculty are women, wouldn't part of the qualifications you are looking for in an applicant be that that person is a good mentor to many of the students in your department? Does it not diminish the quality of the department in its ability to teach and mentor if every single faculty was a white male? It is important to recognize that the role of the faculty extends beyond just writing papers in obscure journals; "qualification" is a term that ought to be understood much more broadly than you may think.

(I think it's important to say that the role of women in math departments is not to be there as mentors. All I want to say is that I want diversity to be part of the many considerations when deciding who is "best qualified" for a job.)


"You are one of our top candidates." How many candidates are there likely to be? I have applied for a Ph.D. position at a research group in a European University and gotten an acknowledgement from a research unit member. His reply states "... you are one of our top candidates and we would like to pursue your application further. Can you provide us with some of your program codes and two references we can contact."

I have given them some of my codes and details of two of my professors for references. Its almost two weeks now and I've not received any feedback or rejection from them. He/They usually replied back within two working days during our earlier correspondences.

My question is "Am I rejected already?" and how many candidates are usually in a  'top candidates' list?
(The Ph.D. position is to get the degree working with the research group and develop softwares for the group, etc.)

I wouldn't necessarily read anything into this.

Often times there are a number of applications which might be reviewed. (For an open PhD position in my group, I might interview anywhere from three to six candidates, depending on the strength of the overall candidate pool.)

Two weeks to go through evaluations of a number of different packages, including reviewing code and contacting references, is not unusual. Not only that, there's always the possibility that the person conducting the review has had other things come up in the interim (work commitments, vacations, or health issues, for instance).

I would wait a few more weeks, if possible, before politely inquiring about the status of your application. (For example, "I haven't heard back from you in several weeks. Could you please inform me of the status of my application?")


What laws exist in India to protect students from harassment by teachers/professors? I am a college student in Rajasthan. I had a chance to address a large group at a college function, and in my address I said unfavorable things about professors in the college. Since then, I believe their behavior towards me has changed, and that they are personally targeting me.

I want to know what steps we can take against:

teachers scoring us according to some personal vendetta,
extremely rude language/behavior,
unnecessary targeting.

What laws exist in India to protect students from harassment by teachers/professors?

From the discussion above, it seems like you are an engineering/technical student. Technical education in India falls under the concurrent list -- i.e. both state and union laws apply.

The relevant national body is the AICTE, which does have a mechanism for grievance redressal, this is often used as the primary source of complaints against ragging.

You can submit a grievance here. The 2004 Guidelines for Grievance Processes require a sub-30-day resolution of complaints. In fact, all accredited technical institutions in India are required to have a local Grievance Redressal Cell and Ombudsman as per this 2012 notification. Finally, you could contact AICTE directly

Students may also file grievances at the UGC (University Grants Commission). The UGC is a statutory body in charge of "coordination, determination and maintenance of standards of higher education". In 1987, they released "Guidelines for Student Entitlement". See sections 2.5, 2.6 regarding fairness in evaluation and section 5 which deals with discriminatory treatment.

At a state-level, you could try Rajasthan Sampark, which only applies to government institutions.

As others have stated, you need to ensure that you have documented and clear proof to support your accusation, and that you should not back down in fear of reprisal. The process of collecting evidence may help you determine if you truly have a valid complaint, or are perceiving bias that does not exist.

To the best of my knowledge, in answer to your second question, no, Indian jurisprudence does not have a similar concept of student rights as the United  States and some of Europe.

While reading the links for the other answers and searching for policies for this post, the one thing that becomes clear is a worrying lack of depth in policies and transparently available policies and data. If you choose to take this forward, I hope that you will document and publish your efforts.


Issues with Master admission because of transfer to another university during undergraduate studies This year I'm trying to get into the Master's program. There is one particular university where I want to get into, say its name is X.
X is asking me to provide transcripts of my all previous higher education programs, even uncompleted ones.
The thing is that during my undergraduate studies I've transferred from one higher institution to another. The first university was one of the best programs in my country, it featured many hours of great courses and so on. However, because of my not very good performance there I had to transfer to another university. During my studies in the first university, I got 6 Bs and 2 Cs and a couple of passes which yielded a GPA of 2.85.
Now, I'm in the last (4th) year of bachelor studies in the second university and got a GPA of around 3.4. It is worth mentioning that while transferring some grades from my previous university got matched to classes of the second university (and thus some Cs and Bs from the first university were added to the transcript from the second university), so I can be admitted to the second year.
Fast forward to the actual question. As I am highly dependant on scholarship, I feel like if I mention my first higher institution experience and attach a transcript for it I won't be able to get a scholarship here. If I don't mention it though, I will create a chance to be rejected because of a discrepancy in my portfolio, as in the transcript from my second university it is mentioned that the standard period of study on my program is 4 years. And it is also stated that I was enrolled in 2018 and will be graduating in 2021 (3 years here), exactly because I was admitted to the second year.
I don't want to violate any rules, but, even though I have a solid portfolio (in my opinion), I feel that If I will attach a transcript from my first university the race for a scholarship will be pretty much over for me, so I don't really have anything to lose here and it's might be worth trying to take a risk. I also think that there is a small chance that admission committee members won't notice the discrepancy.
What would you do in my situation?
Thank you

Don't lie.  They asked for all your transcripts, so if you omit one then your application is fraudulent. Even if you're admitted to this masters program, fraud in your application should be sufficient reason to expel you if it's discovered later.


What to do if my internet connection drops during the exam? Next week I will start having online exams. One of the rules is that the camera must stay on during the whole time. Unfortunately, my internet connection will occasionally drop. This will happen rarely (maybe a few times a day) and will last from one to a few minutes. I am very worried that if this happens during the exam the professor may be suspicious. What can I do to assure him I'm not cheating?

That is usually covered in the documentation and what the professor decides both prior to and after a situation.


citing from figure in a review I found an interesting figure in a review which has no reference ( i assumed that it belongs to the review author if i am wrong kindly correct my idea) , can i paraphrase the caption or use the figure information and paraphrase it ( deal with it as any original data from any article review ?).
additionally, what are the elements in the review paper that belongs to the review author ? is it just the conclusion and the non referenced figures ??

It's hard to tell without the exact context, but in all likelihood "yes".  Two issues to consider are (1) copyright/plagiarism and (2) accuracy.

Don't make an exact copy of the figure or the caption.  Reword it and convert it to your intent somehow.  Also, cite the review paper as the source.
I get a sniff of concern that the curve may be made up ("cartoon") or the like since it is not well referenced or discussed.  This is not the end of the world, but just consider the context to see how much this is a real concern.  Also, how you will use it (e.g. to make a general point or to do detailed calculations from).  You can also cover yourself a bit by actually naming the review author, so it is clear that it is "Smith's" view, not yours.


When do STEM academics learn how to manage funding? I'm from the humanities, where research grants etc. are scarce. Also, training to deal with research grants and external funding is nearly non-existent in my field.
I'm curious as to how graduate students in more external money-heavy areas like engineering or medicine (or maybe even computer science?) learn how to manage a lab.
I saw Managing lab funds , How does laboratory funding and money management work in grad school?,  and a few other posts but it still feels opaque to me how people become adept at managing research money at scale — and yet this is a really central part of the job in many fields (but as I said above — not common in mine).
Presumably a lot of that money has allocation rules, accounting rules, and can be audited to insure compliance too.

Are there courses in graduate school?
is it learned informally from being a postdoc?
or does everyone take a funding management compliance course at their university?

Other questions indicate that people do have knowledge of this: Is it usually allowed to use grant money for voluntary contributions? but it’s hard to believe no one has an explanation of how they got this knowledge.

As with many parts of becomes a group leader and teacher, this is just something you are expected to be able to do. I was never given any training, it was just expected that I was clever enough to work it out!
"allocation rules, accounting rules, and can be audited to insure compliance too"  is usually handled by central admin who are professional accountants and administrators.


Grants: how to acknowledge collaboration, techniques from postdocs or students? Grants for the NSF/NIH/many other government agencies often only allow people who are in "faculty-level" academic positions to be PIs and co-PIs*. When this is true, what is the best way of acknowledging a postdoc/student's contribution to the grant if they wrote large portions of it or made significant intellectual contributions?  In addition, sometimes a postdoc/student has significant relevant experience that a PI lacks. What is the best way to highlight this, both to credit the postdoc and prevent reviewers from raising this as an issue?  (I'm most interested in NSF here, but NIH/others would also be interesting.)

Possible answers:
 - including the postdoc on the grant as a co-author, but not a co-PI (I believe this is possible for NSF)
 - Highlighting the postdoc's skills in the proposal itself/including postdoc's bio.
 - Adding a "letter of collaboration" from the postdoc. (If, for instance, the postdoc is in a somewhat independent position and can't be listed as personnel.)

(* This of course depends on the agency, the institution, probably even the type of grant.)

This question is essentially the PI-side version of this one: What to do when an advisor takes credit for a grant proposal?

Regarding "sometimes a postdoc has significant relevant experience that a PI lacks", I have been referred to by name in (successful) NSF proposals I have co-authored to highlight some expertise I bring to the project, e.g.

  ff524, a PhD student whose efforts have contributed to the research component of the project, will also be engaged in X. [insert my impressive background in X here]

or

  This interdisciplinary collaboration is facilitated by ff524, a PhD student in Department A who has previously worked with PI X in Department A as well as with PI Y in Department B.

Presumably one could do the same with postdocs.


Should I mention in my thesis that a live demonstration motivated me to implement an algorithm instead of others? I am currently writing my bachelor thesis, in which I compare different algorithms for solving a specific problem to each other.
Since there are a lot of available published approaches, I did a literature review to choose algorithms relevant for me to implement.
In my thesis I would like to justify my choice of algorithms.

For one of these, I was convinced by a live demonstration on an exhibition-like event, where the algorithm was shown to perform reasonably well in real-time on the target platform.

My questions regarding this situation are

Does my personal, subjective experience with this algorithm justify its implementation?
If so, what would be the appropriate way to mention this in a thesis context?

I imagine this kind of question could also potentially be relevant to other types of theses or publications, which is why I chose the respective tags.

Yeah, definitely.

Comments on the reason you started work are totally appropriate in the introduction of a thesis and even make it a little less dry.  It makes it a little more of a narrative.  You still have to show all the dry results and analysis and all that.  But some minicum of storyline is actually a positive.

Actually even in a paper (where you are limited in format and space to concentrate more on results), some motivational comments in the intro are still totally in place in the introduction.  They set context, they help people.  In a thesis, even more scope is available and desired for explaining motivation (which gives contextual insights).  In science talks it is also very important (not just allowed) to show motivation (personal, economic, or social) in the intro.

I'm sure it is possible to overdo it, but in general, the issue is more the opposite (people not explaining personal motivation, inspiration from other researchers, economic motivations, etc. sufficiently).


University asking for documents I just uploaded online I just applied to University online (since that is the only way to apply). However, they say we must get previous Universities to mail them official transcripts, but everything else is done online.

Before pressing Validate and Submit button, I checked and rechecked (several times) whether I filled in everything and included

Three letters of recommendation
Current resume
Statement of purpose.

Then I submitted the application online and get confirmation email that says

  Please submit the following required documents to complete your
  application:

  Official University Transcripts
  Two Letters of Recommendation
  Resume or Curriculum Vitae
  Statement of Purpose
  GRE or GMAT (if applicable)
  TOEFL, IELTS, CAE, or PTE Academic (if applicable)

Ok, I understand I have get previous Universities to send official transcripts, but why is it asking for letters of recommendation, resume, and statement of purpose again?

Is this simply a canned response?

My question: How inform graduate admissions that I uploaded letters of recommendation, resume, and statement of purpose online, and to confirm whether they received it.

Please advise.

Don't overthink this.  Just send them an email and ask.


Would using the advanced built-in functions on a CAS calculator be cheating? On a test on a course that isn't math, but uses it, such as physics or engineering, would using a CAS to reduce the handiwork I have to do be considered cheating?
For example, what if I used the equation solver to solve equations, rather than do it by hand? Or what if I let the calculator do integrals and differentiations for me?

This is assuming the professor never said anything about what kind of calculators were allowed, nor about what we do with them. (Using them as a cheat sheet would definitely be cheating, but this is not what I am asking about.)


Benefit of a 1-year MSc in Comp Sci in the UK I hope this is the appropriate stacksite to ask this question.

I have a BSc in Computer Software Development and would very much like to study another year for an MSc in Computer Science. I had the choice of an MEng but decided to take the separate MSc.

I've heard mixed opinions on the subject but considering the climate I personally think it would be a good idea to gain a post-graduate degree. I've heard from Master students who were able to open many more opportunities from gaining an MSc - such as successfully entering the Game Industry which I know is very competitive. Although I'm not one for Game related modules, I chose more software engineering, database, and programming modules instead of rendering and games design modules throughout my BSc.

I will be getting into a considerable amount of additional debt to fund this year, but I feel like I'd be much more employable so the debt wouldn't really be a problem.

What do you think? Any advice or input would be greatly appreciated. I am 23 and an Englishman, just to put things into perspective.

You didn't mention if you want to do an MS in the UK or the US. If the former, I have no experience of how it works over there.

In general, an MS in CS does improve your chances of getting a decent job, but a lot depends on where you're getting an MS. In the US, the masters program is often viewed as a way to generate revenue via tuition, so your main benefit from the program is if it's very good at placing students. Obviously an MS from a place like Stanford or Berkeley will help you immensely because of the proximity of many tech options. But if you don't go to a place that has a good track record with placement, then the degree itself, while opening some doors, will not have provided you with maximum benefit for the price you're paying.

Also, make sure you go to a place that has strong ties to industry in the areas you're interested in. Since you mentioned games, many universities (including mine!) have specialized MS programs in game design (and we have fairly strong ties to local industry in the game world). That might be too specialized for you, but you get the general drift


How do academia and graduate advisors deal with the fact that the cost of living is dramatically higher but graduate wages is stagnant? My supervisor got his PhD in the 1970s while having two kids and a house. He spent 25k on the house. Everyone from that era, even the 80s or 90s, said that their degree was dirt cheap and they were very easily transiting from academia to work life post graduation.

Fast forward to the present day, my graduate wage is 25k/yr (most of which is spent on tuition) and the housing prices in my city are 70k-100k for tiny small apartment. Almost all the housing prices are rising due to speculation and price for even basic daily necessities such as food or even a hair cut is rising.

I am going to a conference but I can't go because the plane ticket alone cost $1000 dollar. Uploading a paper cost $100, an additional one cost $300. Registration $300. All the conference prices are rising and many students are frustrated but the conference organizer insist on places such as fancy resorts or islands. It feels like a hustle.

How do academia rationalize the reality that the cost of living has risen dramatically, yet graduate wages are stagnant, making the graduate degree nowadays a very costly and risky journey. How do academic advisors support students in these times when their students are all living around the poverty line, the same bright students who could easily make 100k-200k working as a programmer?

I sometimes wonder if the only reason I am admitted is that I am from a third world country and people assumed we are satisfied with less and unequal pay. Not unequal with respect to other graduate students, but unequal with respect to people who has citizenship with the same skill.

This might prove controversial but I'm going to reverse the question: why do PhD students accept being underpaid? As long as academic institutions find candidates willing to be underpaid, they have no reason to raise the wages. If the PhD students themselves don't defend their claim to a better compensation, who will?

In some countries PhD students are staff with a proper employment contract (I'm aware of at least Germany and France, probably others as well). The advantages of this system from the PhD student perspective are:

Access to health, pension and unemployment benefits in accordance with the country regulations
The PhD counts as a professional experience
The salary is usually indexed on some public employment salary scale
Symbolically improved social status, e.g. when being vetted for an apartment or a mortgage.

Obviously this option is more costly for the academic institutions, which means that they had to reduce the number of PhD students hired in order to increase the salary.

In France, the transition from student stipend to work contract happened at the beginning of the 2000s. The movement originated from the PhD students themselves and was driven by the Confédération des Étudiants Chercheurs (students researchers federation, later appropriately renamed as the Confédération des Jeunes Chercheurs, junior researchers federation). The central claim was that even if PhD students are researchers in training, they actually carry out productive research work, as illustrated by the fact that 50% of scientific publications have a PhD student as first author. Therefore legal cases were brought that their work qualifies as regular employment, and that the student stipend system was simply illegal according to labor laws. Institutions and funding bodies reluctantly complied over the next decade or so, for fear of legal challenges and/or bad publicity.


Bad student evaluations So I just read my evaluations for this past semester, and they are absolutely horrible.  The worst I've ever gotten.  I put so much effort into teaching, but almost nobody thinks I did a good job.  Do you think this will prevent me from teaching next semester? I have a 9-month renewable instructor position that goes through the Spring but I'm really worried.

The first thing I'd do in your situation is to get as much information as possible from the evaluations, especially from the students' comments. What exactly did they not like? Was it something about you or about the course?    There are lots of reasons for bad evaluations. Some reasons are things you should pay attention to and change. Other reasons are beyond your control. Did the student population consist mostly of students who didn't want to take the course but needed it to fulfill some requirement? Did the course meet at 8 a.m. (or earlier)?

If you haven't taught this course before, you might want to get some statistical data on the evaluations other instructors got in the same course. Some courses are just really unpopular and produce lousy evaluations even for the best instructors.

As for renewal of your appointment, that depends on your department's administrators and the numbers of students who need to take your department's courses. The administrators may know that the course you taught always yields lousy evaluations, in which case there should be no problem. Other presumably relevant factors include your general reputation as a teacher (e.g., your past evaluations) and the actual evaluations that you just got.  (You said they were "horrible" and "the worst" you've ever gotten --- but might it be that your past evaluations were excellent and these new ones are mediocre, so they're your worst and they look horrible to you but might not be horrible on an absolute scale?)  But in general, the only way to find out about your situation is to talk with the relevant administrator(s).


Can I post a pre-print of my paper on ArXiv knowing the paper will go through major changes? Alternatives? I wrote a paper with a new approach and I implemented this approach in both R and SAS. I want to put the software online on Github and ideally on CRAN too. The paper has been reviewed by my collaborators, but I was told that the structure is atypical as this is my first paper and I used a structure more typical of a thesis. The paper will need to go trough major changes and it will have the reorganized differently. Still the modelling approach itself is good and well detailed in the paper.

I’d like to release the software on Github and include the current draft of the paper with it but I’m wondering if I should also sent it to ArXiv at the same time even though it’s not publication-ready. Is putting my paper on Github (and maybe Researchgate?) enough to prevent someone from legally stealing my work? Can I and should I send it to a place like ArXiv? Should I put a license on the online draft?

If you only want people who use your code to read the paper in its present form, then post it on Github with the code.  If you want a broader audience of researchers to read it in its present form, post it on arXiv.

Updating it with substantial changes later is not a problem.  Contrary to what one of the other posted answers says, the update feature on arXiv is most commonly used to post the author's final version after peer review, which frequently contains major revisions.

I wouldn't post things to ResearchGate; to many (myself included) it is viewed mainly as a source of spam.


Acceptance criteria for short papers I feel overwhelmed for the acceptance rate of some conferences. If I submit a "short paper" rather than a regular one, Will that make easier to get accepted? I don't have any JCR* at the moment (nor any paper accepted on high ranked conferences). My research is a software artifact that has been tested (not only unit-tested, but integrated in a bigger architecture and proved to be compatible with external applications) but not evaluated by a broad audience of users.

*i.e.: I don't have any scientific article published in a journal that is indexed by the Thomson's Journal Citation Report. For more info on JCR, please visit: http://thomsonreuters.com/journal-citation-reports/ . JCR index is used, among other things, to measure the quality of a journal.

I feel overwhelmed for the acceptance rate of some conferences

I know the feeling. I have just a few days ago received a reject (with mostly positive comments) from a conference with an acceptance rate of less than 14%. Happens to the best of us. (or more accurately, it mathematically has to happen to most people most of the time, otherwise you can't end up with such low acceptance rates)

  If I submit a "short paper" rather than a regular one, Will that make easier to get accepted?

Generally yes, but the "short paper" tracks at some conferences have in the mean time become viciously competitive as well. In one major conference in my field, the acceptance rate for work-in-progress papers is nowadays below 20% as well.

By and large, whether you should submit a short paper or a full paper (potentially at a weaker conference) depends on how mature your work is. A short paper at a strong conference has good chances if it is ongoing work with very high potential; mediocre finished work is likely to be rejected as a full or short paper at such venues. You have better chances if you submit a full paper to a weaker conference in this case.

  My research is a software artifact that has been tested (not only unit-tested, but integrated in a bigger architecture and proved to be compatible with external applications) but not evaluated by a broad audience of users.

In most fields, whether your component is "compatible with external applications" or whether it has been "evaluated by a broad audience of users" are not the core questions for scientific merit. There are almost infinite "software systems" out there for which both of these properties are true, and which are scientifically still entirely irrelevant (pretty much all standard software, for instance). More relevant is whether the research question underlying your work is interesting, and whether your work in its current stage is able to sufficiently and convincingly answer this research question.