How do you defend against TA proctor false accusation of "seeing you look at others computer screen" to cheat on final Proctor accuses me of cheating on final exam "By looking at others computer screens" on multiple choice exam with randomized answers. Cheating complaint states "matched 10 of 20 questions on the exam".  I had 4 incorrect answers.  Average for exam was 5 incorrect answers. I was one of the first 10 students to complete and turn in exam in an examination room of 200 students.  Professor asked me to write down name after exam stating "you are not in any trouble or anything".  One student (who I didn't know) 2 seats away from mine was moved during the exam (I was 3/4 done with exam at this time). The first I heard of cheating accusation was 5 months after exam when Academic Integrity office notified me of charge. Neither professor or proctor made any attempt to contact me prior to formal charges. Professor states in charge he "did not witness me cheating only TA proctor did" although both were present in the room. Two other students are mentioned and accused of cheating. I have no knowledge of and have never met either student -but assume one is the student mentioned above because Professor states "they moved one student suspected of cheating during the exam.  He was two seats away from me, with another student I barely know (and not named in complaint) between us.
I was the second student to arrive prior to the exam. I chose an end-of-row seat (on the aisle).  Professor asked me to move to the center of the row to make it easier for other students to access seats and I complied with his request.I ended up in the center of the row--therefore no predetermined seating could have been set up for me to cheat. I only needed a 30% on exam to maintain my grade in course.  GPA was 4.0.  I did not and would never cheat (especially off people I am unaware of their knowledge in a course). How do I defend my word against the proctor before an Integrity panel?

I think the evidence is weak unless you were extremely obvious about looking at other screens. Matching answers is almost never evidence of wrongdoing. In fact, matching incorrect answers can be evidence of poor question statements. And matching correct answers is just evidence of knowledge gained.

I would state what you have here. I didn't cheat. I had no need to cheat. I finished early. The proctor was simply mistaken.

Part of the problem in such situations is that no matter what we are doing or thinking, unless we have closed our eyes, they point somewhere. It is easy to misinterpret a look.

And a five month delay before being informed seems to be disqualifying to me. Presumably the proctor didn't have enough "evidence" to call you on it during the exam.

Sadly, no one can guarantee fair treatment in such cases.


Should glossary links be used as much as possible? There are two terms in my thesis that I'm using throughout the entire work. They have been added to the glossary for that reason. However, by the time I got to chapter 4 or so I've stopped writing them as PDF hyperlinks (so that they can jump to the corresponding entry in the glossary) because I got really tired of it.

My assumption was that by this point the reader should know what the glossary terms mean.

Is this okay or should I use glossary hyperlinks as much as possible?

Actually, I question the value of hyperlinks at all. You are assuming that the reader will be using a specific technology to read, rather than just a printout.

It is really enough, in my opinion, to refer to the glossary at the first use of a term and forgo it thereafter. If the reader is aware that there is a glossary, they can go there in any case if they are puzzled.

The links will interrupt the flow of reading in any case. There is value in making the work beautiful, not just informative.


Coverage of Web of Science The reason I'm asking this question is that I've never used Web of Science before. My apologies if it is silly or irrelevant.

I'm gathering materials for an application to a tenure-track job, and one of the things I have to submit is a list of my publications as indexed in WoS. This is an important thing for them, because they make it clear in the call for applications that those publications that are indexed in WoS are going to count more that those that don't (they do it this way because the call is division-wide, not department-specific, so they use WoS as a scholarship quality metric that doesn't require the members of the search committee to be experts in the specific fields of the candidates).

WoS behaves well in that, if I query my name and field, it returns all of my journal publications, including a couple of obscure book reviews I did in my first year of grad school. On the other hand, it also behaves badly in that it fails to return anything that is not a journal publication. This bothers me because I have a couple of book chapters with reputable presses (e.g., OUP) and proceedings of high-profile conferences that my peers and mentors acknowledge are as important (in terms of quality and contribution to the field) as any of my journal publications; but because they don't appear in WoS, the search committee will view them as second-rate publications.

The question is, is there a way I can make WoS index these publications?

Web of Science is terrible in coverage of many fields (not sure what yours is from the post), and if you're stuck with it, you're stuck with it.  Try to see if there's anywhere that you can also say, "and here are my important publications that WoS doesn't cover, and here are all of their many many citations..."


Dollar amount of NSF grant How do you decide how much money to request?  Must you have a detailed list of costs?  How much money can be taken by the PI, for instance, for summer pay?  I really don't understand how the numbers are reached; they seem totally arbitrary to me.

For senior personnel (like the principal investigators) the NSF limit salary to 2 months salary for each person per year, which is held across all NSF-funded grants (so if you are listed on 100 NSF grants you still can only get 2 months per year for yourself in total).

As to the budget questions - yes, you'll need a budget, plenty of supporting detail and reasoning, and yes there are lots of rules about everything from computer equipment to salary for clerical workers. Most common questions can be answered by reviewing the NSF Proposal & Award Policies & Procedures Guide. There is no single rule of thumb on how much to ask for, as the range of awards varies quite widely (and for the NSF is usually stated in Dear Colleague letters or public grant invitations on specific topics), but in general if you don't have a really good idea of how much things might cost to go into the budget for what to ask for, the panel will probably quickly notice you haven't thought things out in enough detail and reject it easily in an early round. You can be reasonably assured that someone - and probably many people - will look at each line item in a submitted budget, so they will need to be sensible, clearly defined, and obviously necessary or highly desirable for ensuring the success of the project. If the budget given does indeed seem arbitrary to someone who has looked at hundreds of grant requests in the last month (or week), that will not bode well for the likelihood of success.

If you are affiliated with an institution that applies for NSF funding in general, there is probably a dedicated staff member (or a whole department) dedicated to supporting grant requests, so you should also definitely reach out to them to get information on what sort of support is available - which is much easier than trying to figure out everything on your own. They may have templates, workshops, guides, internal reviews, etc. - or at least, some institutions have all that. Check to see before doing it all the hard way.


Getting a patent after a poster abstract got accepted I have submitted a poster abstract with my supervisors. The poster abstract got accepted, but we have not presented the poster yet.  The poster describes a method we have invented and now we consider applying for a patent.
Can we still do this? I know this is not possible if we have published the method in an article, but does an accepted poster abstract count as a publication? I'm a PhD student in Europe.

You have not yet made what's called a public disclosure of your research, which would render it (from an institutional standpoint) un-patentable. The second you display your poster, or if there is a short paper published along side it, is the second your work becomes publicly disclosed. Also bear in mind that if you have, on some website or another, posted code pertaining to the project, etc. this counts as a public disclosure.

As MJeffryes mentioned in his comment, you should talk with the office at your institution responsible for such endeavors (at mine it is called the research foundation) as soon as possible. The patent process takes quite some time (re: years; just FYI). Anyway, they should be able to fill you in on all that's necessary and the steps you should take, should you want to pursue that course of action.

Edit: As Dan Romik pointed out in the comments, at least in the US, there is a one-year grace period, from when you make a public disclosure, that your work can still be patented-- but anybody could patent it. I found this helpful in terms of clarifying some of the specifics.  However, in speaking with the individual in charge of the research foundation at my institution, the impression I got was that, once this public disclosure was made, the foundation was no longer willing to pursue a patent (again, at my particular institution).


Citation style for research statement As I understand, I'm rather free to choose a publication (and, thus, citation) style for a research statement. While being in graduate school (master's and doctoral programs), I've used APA, as it was school-wide standard and a requirement for Ph.D. dissertation. As a result, I'm quite familiar with that publication style. However, most of research statements that I've seen, use citation style that is different from one of APA style's (don't remember the name of that citation style, if it exists).

While the main part of using square brackets, etc. is easy and natural, I'm a little concerned about formatting differences in reference list, so I'd prefer to use familiar to me APA style's conventions.

Question: will using APA style's citation scheme have any negative effect on my research statement's readability, overall acceptance and, ultimately, on search committee's decision making?

No sane search committee member is likely to care about your citation style as long as it looks "professional." Nobody is grading you here, so really, you're just looking to avoid raising red flags.

So, what is "professional"? By that, I mean that it looks pretty much like something that they would likely see in a publication.  Most fields have a range of citation styles found in different publications, and thus pretty much anything that fits within such a range is likely to not be remarkable, and your goal for your citations is simply that.

One last note, though: it seems that your choice of citation style is being dictated significantly by inertia of familiarity with APA.  Since you will likely be required by future publications to use a range of citation styles, you may wish to switch from manual citation to using citation management software, which will help simplify compliance with a wide range of styles.


Would it be considered cheating to ask for homework help on the internet, if I openly acknowledge the help received? Say you have a homework assignment and you're struggling with it. You ask a question about some portion of it on a site like physics.stackexchange or math.SE or stackoverflow.com, etc.

You then cite the help you received in your homework, as well as including a link to the post which helped you.

Given that you are removing the "dishonesty" part of the equation, is this still considered cheating? Or would a professor just not give you credit for the part which they feel you didn't do on your own?

This depends a great deal on the professor and course in question.  Better to ask first if you plan to do this.  Also, check the syllabus if there is a stated policy regarding help on homework.


PI coauthorship on previous papers I independently wrote a number of math articles, and published some of them in refereed journals. I wrote the draft of the thesis, and contacted a Prof., and started a PhD program under his supervision. After being accepted, the supervisor

Asked me to change all notations and terminology. I hesitate, because I used the terminology in use in the domain, I kept at minimum new terms, and I already used these terms in the published papers.
Asked me to make him coauthor of some of the papers I haven't yet published, and which I wrote previously, without any suggestion or discussion with him. He motivated his request by saying that my articles need to be polished (ie terminology changed with an invented one), and that even when they will be ready, nobody will accept them with my name only (although I already published some articles as single author).

He is very assertive with these requests, and I feel like he is putting pressure on me. Normally, I would like to have him as coauthor, and maybe it will be good for my career. But I am affraid that he will make my results unrecognizable, and incompatible with the other papers in domain, including my owns. And, frankly, his only contribution is that he suggested to change the terminology.

What should I do?

We cannot tell you what the best decision is, but I get the feeling from your post that you already have some course of action in mind: politely decline, with your arguments, and if he insists too much, find another advisor. I would agree with that being the best solution for you, but only assuming that your assessment of the situation is correct.

Don't take it badly, but I have seen it happen before. An established researcher gives advice to a newcomer (or more junior researcher), who disagrees and concludes that such bad advice can only be motivated by self interest. That sure is one possible explanation, but another might be that the advice is (partly or fully) correct, but the student doesn't recognize it (yet). Take a second look at his advice... There can be good reasons to suggest nonstandard notation: trying to make the paper more appealing to the community of another field, by using their notations. Or making the case that existing notation doesn't properly cover the cases considered. Or maybe what you consider standard notation actually isn't, and you are currently using a notation used by a prolific research group (bias in your reading list).

I am not saying that it is your case. I'm only saying that you should seriously consider it before taking any action.


How to Get Over Feelings of Being a Failure in Engineering/Academia It's my first time posting here, and I have a relatively personal issue that I would like to discuss. I studied electrical engineering in college and was accepted to the integrated BS/MS program at my alma mater later in my senior year. However, due to immense stress over my OCD symptoms(obsessive thoughts) and long-term burn-out, I dropped out of that program after a year without a master's degree.
I spent another year trying to reset and reboot myself (doing part-time jobs, volunteering, reading, spending time with family), and am now a second year master's student in biostatistics under public health (was attracted to public health due to my mental health struggles). I can say that I am in a much better place now than the dark times and I am also working as an engineering intern at a medical device company which gives me a sense of purpose.
However, even after two years, I still haven't fully dropped my baggage of being a "failure" and not good enough. My best friend in college is working on her PhD in engineering and I used to expect myself to do a PhD in engineering as well. Even though now I have a clearer sense of what I truly want, somehow unconsciously I still think there could have been a better version of me -- someone who's stronger and more determined to get through whatever grinds/difficulties and go all the way up to a PhD. Intellectually I know that I might already have or will gain those qualities through my career, but emotionally I still think I somehow have failed and incurred enormous sunk cost and am much less of the best version of me.
Thank you for reading this far and hopefully someone can give me some much-needed advice. Hugs to you if you have been in similar situations.

It is not helpful to compare yourself to who you aren't.  There is an interesting concept in economics called "opportunity cost", which is essentially the cost of not doing something because, due to limited resources, you chose to do something else instead.  In your case, you left your program and focused on yourself rather than your academics.  Essentially, you chose to work on your internal issues at the expense of your first masters program.  You couldn't do both ,and you had to choose one.  No problem with that.
A better question to ask yourself is: "what do I do now?"  You clearly have a goal in mind for who you feel you need to be in order to be a) successful and b) an academic.  Whether there is overlap between those two or not is debatable, but for now let's assume you want to be both successful and an academic.
You also feel that there are parts of yourself that need work still, and I'm assuming this involves at least academics and personal, internal stuff.  You won't be able to fix it all by posting to stack exchange.  Instead, I think that there are some low-hanging fruit problems that you can start to tackle.

You compare yourself negatively to the person you want to be.  Instead, use that as motivation.  So instead of "I can't organize my research project" say "My best self can organize their research projects.  They do that by..." and then list the things you feel you should be able to do but aren't doing yet.

You seem to be comparing yourself to your colleague who has taken a different path than you have.  Again, motivate, don't discourage yourself.  We compare ourselves to others all the time.  It is totally fair, and probably true, to say that we'll never be "as good" as everyone we look up to.  That doesn't mean that we can't be good at things, and it doesn't mean we can't use those people as examples of how to achieve our own success.

Whether you're starting later or not doesn't matter.  I personally remember thinking that I'd be "so old" when I graduated from my undergrad that I wouldn't be able to do any more learning or growth.  I have since come to understand that what I was really afraid of was being too inexperienced, not too experienced.  I didn't think I had enough time to gain the experience I needed, but I've since realized that a few years here or there to work on things is perfectly acceptable.  How many people go back and do PhDs in their fifties or even later?  Just because it's not how it's usually done doesn't mean it can't be done.
Finally, you appear to be planning to fail.  I think that you are giving yourself an unfair safety net here.  It's easy to say that I won't start because I will fail anyway.  It's much harder to start and fail.


Reference citations sequence for "Crescent Classification" Kindly can one guide me about crescent classification in references citation.
I have received a review that is following

  "for instance in the sequence of citations [5], [7] and [6], which must
  be changed to cope to a crescent classification"

I have searched through the google but couldn't find any solution or knowledge about it.

Thanks.

Usually, numerical citations are required to be sorted in increasing order. It might not be a hard requirement for all the journals which use numerical citations, but it makes citations more readable, and it allows abbreviations such as "[5-7]", instead of "[5], [6] and [7]".

The example given by the reviewer can essentially arise in two cases:

The reference list is not sorted according to the citation order: The solution here is, indeed, to sort the list of references according to the citation order. The way to achieve this depends on the typesetting system you are using. If you had typeset the manuscript with LaTeX and set-up the references with Bib(La)TeX, let them fix the order by using suitable options (for more detail on this, search the documentation; if this fails, ask on TeX.SE). If you had set-up the list of references manually (I hope not), then manually change the order.
There are multiple citations along the manuscript with inconsistent order: Suppose that in Section I you have cited three references with order [1], [2], and [3], and then in Section II you have cited those references again, in the same sentence, but with different order, e.g., [3], [1], and [2]. Here the solution is to rephrase the sentence in Section II to cite the references in the order [1], [2], and [3].

This is as far I can go with the details you provided.


How can I timestamp my paper without violating double-blind review? I submitted a paper to a top tier conference and it did not get accepted. The paper contains an original idea, and I am afraid that the paper could get plagiarized between the time I send it to another conference after incorporating reviewer's suggestions and making some modifications. Such things have happened in the past to a few students in my department.

I had considered posting the paper on arxiv as a means of timestamping before sending it to the aforementioned conference, but didn't, as this would have violated the double-blind review requirements of the conference. (The conference chair replied to my query as follows:)

  The submission of a paper in the arxhiv.org system is not strictly
  speaking a double-submission, but rather a violation of a double-blind
  submission required in this conference, as the reviewers will be able to
  find your name (and those of the coauthors) if they do a simple search
  in Google. Thus, I am quite certain it will be rejected, and I do not
  consider it an acceptable practice in this conference's submission to be
  fair with all the submissions in order to handle them equally during the
  review process by the reviewers.

Hence I had not posted it on arxiv. Now this paper has been rejected and I would like to timestamp this paper now, while still being able to send a modified version to some conferences in the future (including those that follow a double-blind review).

Is there a mechanism by which I can timestamp my paper that does not violate the blind review requirements?

Edit: The paper was in computer science, if that matters.
A related question "How can I time-stamp my data without publishing it?" asks about ways to timestamp while keeping the information in the paper private or hidden to avoid plagiarism. However my question is about ways to timestamp such that it is still possible to publish the information while not violating blind review.

The most typical way to time-stamp a piece of work is to place it in a public repository: arXiv is a good example when it applies; many institutions also have a technical memo or technical report system in place.  Although this may technically violate certain interpretations of double-blind submissions, as noted in the comments blinding of authorship is pretty iffy in many cases.  Moreover, in practice this will only be violated if the reviewers actively go looking, particularly if you put it in an institutional repository rather than a global one like arXiv.  I would thus advise that if you are worried about date-stamping, just do it and let the double-blind nitpickers complain if they even notice.

One other consideration: certain publications (particularly certain journals) do have a policy against accepting material that is already available online.  While this is in my view an insane policy, if you find yourself dealing with such, one way to handle with it is to put up a shortened version of the work, i.e., extended abstract, as the date-stamped pre-print.


How should I approach a situation where my head of department doesn't want me there? I'm in my first year of a PhD programme in the UK. In this year of the programme we do a few short projects with different supervisors and then choose a supervisor and project for the next 3 years.

My current supervisor is fantastic - I work really well with him and he also thinks highly of me. I am making great progress with my work, everything is going well. Of the ~4 supervisors I've worked with in the past, this experience is by far the best I've had. My supervisor is very keen to have me continue with him for my main project, and I am too.

The problem lies with the head of my supervisor's department, who also happened to have been the head of my master's programme that I took last year (before becoming head of dept this year).

He taught me for a total of three weeks during that master's. I made a bad first impression in the first week when he called on me in class with a question that I didn't know the answer to and I replied with something silly. The second week I was seriously ill and had permission to be absent, but when I came back in the third week he was angry with me for having missed a week. At the end of that short course he gave me a failing grade. I appealed the grade unsuccessfully.

My supervisor has told me that before I started working with him the head of department "warned" him about me and said "I don't want a person like that in my department".

Now my supervisor, having worked with me for a few months, disagrees completely and doesn't understand why the head said that. But, perhaps unsurprisingly, my supervisor doesn't have a very good relationship with the head of department either. I worry that the head will not take his opinion with much weight.

I'm worried that I won't be allowed to continue in this department with my supervisor, and that even if I am there will be trouble down the line. What can I do?

You shouldn't worry so much about political issues in the department. What is important to you right now is to focus hard on the research and publish in significant journals with your supervisor or collaborators. Hence, in this way you can justify that are a serious student in the department, and you can established connections for you career after graduation the PhD program.


Why is there a general dislike for asian universities? I had intentions of applying for higher education in Korea or Japan, but I was told many times that "Doing PhD in an Asian university is a career suicide".

Why is that?

My field is cognitive neuroscience, and to be more specific I'm interested in a  PhD in Cognitive Neuroscience at the Seoul National University.

Maybe because they're less well known (in the US and perhaps Europe too)...?

In the US, for instance, everyone knows about Harvard, Yale, MIT, etc. They probably also know about Oxford and Cambridge. But then, few outside of academia will be able to recognize the quality of programs at the other European universities, such as ETH, EPFL, TU Munich, the University of Copenhagen, or, in the case of Asia: at the University of Tokyo, the National University of Singapore, the University of Hong Kong, the Korea Advanced Institute for Science and Technology, etc. Less recognition means general distaste/disdain.

But then, if you ask people in the right niche, they will give much better evaluations. A physicist will know that the University of Tokyo has a very good (indeed, one of the best) physics department, their research leading to quite a few Nobel prizes. A mathematician would likely recognize the Kyoto University Research Institute for Mathematical Sciences (again, a few of their faculty members have been honored with Fields medals). A computer scientist might know about the National University of Singapore's computing programs. A biomedical scientist would probably have good things to say about the University of Hong Kong, and so on. There's quite a lot of top cadre research going on in many Asian universities!

Moreover, it can even depend on the subfields concerned: for example, in general computer science, the Institut national de recherche en informatique et en automatique (INRIA; the French National Institute for Computer Science) might not pop up as a big name; in my subfield, though, it's a very renowned place. The best advice: ask someone who knows about your field very well!

(Of course, I know very little about SNU, and nothing about cognitive science. But someone has to know.)


Does GPA/Transcript matter for academic jobs after the PhD? Courses taken and GPA can matter quite significantly for undergraduates, both for applying to graduate school and applying for jobs. What about courses taken and GPA during PhD? Do they matter at all for postdoc/professorship application? Do postdoc/professorship application usually ask for a transcript? What about for industry positions? Are there positions that would care about "good grades" or "advanced courses taken" during PhD?

I would guess the answer is largely negative, but I'm willing to hear other opinions.

In my experience on many search committees I've never looked in detail at the coursework or grades of an applicant.  We have however required transcripts as proof of the academic degrees that the applicants claim.


How can a comparative study be novel? I can see several published research papers in SCI journals, even written by undergraduates, that perform a comparative study.
Many of the research papers published under this category evaluate several metrics on the alternative methods that exist in that domain and probably analyze those.
It seems to be just an experimental study followed by comparison. What is the novelty in such papers?
If no novelty exists, then why do good (SCI) journals accept those?

Comparing things is a method.  You cannot judge novelty base on methods.  Novelty is based on conclusions.
For example, if two papers have identical methods but different results leading to different conclusions, they would both be novel.  However, they might not both be correct.


Would it be rude to put my professor's name in for a reference when they haven't responded yet? I asked this professor for a recommendation letter last admissions season, and got a yes immediately and was very good about sending in letters.

This year it's much much harder to get a hold of them, and haven't responded to my recommendation letter email that I sent yesterday (I only sent it late this time because I figured they'd say yes) and my first deadlines are tomorrow. Would it be rude to just put the name in anyway, assuming they don't reply tomorrow? They've done it before so I figure it wouldn't be a bother for them to just re-send letters, but I'm worried it would be rude. But my future is at stake here.

Update: It ended up working out; thanks for your help.

You should absolutely NEVER list somebody as a recommendation without permission. Its asking for trouble.  Your deadline issue is YOUR issue, not your recommenders.  If time is critical, you should have mentioned that in your earlier email.  You should consider a followup email, letting him know that time is critical, or even stop by is office or call.


Is there any obligation for authors of a paper to provide the dataset used in their research, upon request? I've recently read a curious article on machine learning where the author used a very interesting dataset, which would normally take thousands of man-hours to recreate. Now, assuming I would like to either:

Recreate the author's results, or
Improve upon them

Does the author have any obligation to provide me with said dataset?

N.B. In this particular situation the author has declined my request

Inherently? No. While it might be good for science generally, they're under no obligation to do so.

That being said, some funding agencies require data be made available as a condition of their support, and some journals require it as a condition of publication. Absent that though, there's no obligation to do so.


How to write a cover letter to request a postdoc (not advertised) I am going to graduate soon as a Ph.D. in computer science and I am interested in working with a group. However, I don't know the professor and I am not sure whether there is an available postdoc position. How to write a cover in such situation ?

First: make 100% sure there are no official calls for postdocs at their group. It will reflect badly on you, if you apply outside of a call, if there is an open call.

Then: Based on a (more general) guide on writing academic cover letters I read when applying for my postdoc, I would suggest the following:

Explain briefly why you are contacting them. Why do you want to work with them? Be kind but professional, point to the positive thoughts you surely must have about them, but don't try to flatter them.
Explain what you can contribute. Try to aim this towards something that is relevant for them, but do NOT tell them how they can use their skills - that's a conclusion they must reach themself.
Explain your future plans. Again, don't tell them how well those plans fit in with theirs. They might, but this is also up to them.

I would suggest to compress the cover letter more than one usually would. Most professors' inboxes are filled to the brim, and if you want them to read all your selling points, they must be concise. You can always attach a more detailed application letter with your CV, portfolio, etc.


Why do principal investigators not hire grant writers? The success of a research-active professor is related to his successful proposals for securing research funds. For this purpose, he should spend something like half of his time for writing proposals, but still he misses several possible calls for proposals due to the lack of time while the current proposals are not idea.

To resolve this problem, many people have this idea to hire a grant writer to perfectly and quickly write/re-write proposals. I personally heard this from many junior and senior professors, but in practice I have not seen any example.

This plan seems reasonable (the salary of a grant writer should be less than a postdoc), but why it is not common?

Researchers pay much more money to patent attorneys to have legally ideal text, then, why not investing on the text of proposals, which can directly enhance the chance of winning?

Most research staff and many students are paid by grants, but most grant terms do not allow for you to pay for administrative staff or proposal writing time. So the funding has to come from the universities or departments. Most of them don't have the funds to hire a grant writer, though some do. I think most departments would rather have half the funding for another professor than a grant writer. I also think your estimate of the salary of a good grant writer in the sciences is off by large margin. The good ones, employed by institutes with large enough institutional budgets make as much as full-time researchers or professors.


Applying for Ph.D. Program when desired adviser is on leave? I'm an undergraduate student planning to apply for Ph.D. programs in the humanities field this admissions cycle (Fall 2016). I've been contacting a few professors I'd be interested in working with at certain programs. One of the professors at a school that is one of my top choices said that she is on leave for this academic year (Fall 2016-Spring 2017), so she will not be part of admissions, but would be taking in new grad students in the academic year after that, when I would (hopefully) be a first-year grad student. Her research interests are a really good match with my current interests, so I was hoping to have her as my adviser if I got accepted to that school.

Is it alright for an applicant to refer to a professor that they'd like to work with in the personal statement even when that professor is not on-campus for the admissions process? Should I apply anyways and assume that if I'm a strong enough candidate, they'll accept even when my desired adviser will not be on-campus for the admissions committee?

Yes, certainly. Academic leaves are normally for a semester or a year. Faculty may or may not be on the admissions committee the semester they are on leave (they normally aren't if they have an ounce of sense and want to take full advantage of their leave) but they usually still participate in a shadow sense.

For example, when I've been on research leave, my colleagues on admissions forward me the dossiers of people that they know might interest me. If I know a candidate is applying, I might also proactively flag them to the admissions chair.

This way, I can ensure that when I get back from leave, I have a fresh student to work with.

Now, the trickier question is the year before scheduled leaves. Many faculty won't take a student the year before a leave as the student would arrive without an advisor. Others will ask a colleague to serve as temporary advisor for a year if they really want a particular student.

The only way you can know is to ask the faculty member in question if they are taking students.

You asked, she said that she's taking students, so you are all set. As to how to prepare for the oral interview, that's a separate question.

As to the comment that "leaves" are a sign that a faculty is leaving, this is bogus. At most of the institutions I've worked at, when you take a leave, you have to "pay back" the leave by working at least the same amount of time as your leave (one year leave is at least one additional year of work at the old institution). Often, the new university will pay the old university for the leave time, but this is a sore point in negotiations.

It's much more common for a faculty member to negotiate leave at the new university.


How to valorize Volunteering work in a NPO How to valorize Volunteering work for a Non-Profit organization, outside academic duties, such as:

Webmastering work
Technical support and consultancy
Other operation/tactical duty

I am not talking about one shot events such as Conference Planning and Organization.

I think just a one line mention in a CV/Resume, if any, is not satisfactory?

For example:

Volunteering for Institute of Electrical Electronics Engineers (IEEE)
or Project Management Institute (PMI)
or
United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), Etc.

What do you think?

TLDR

If you did significant, relevant work for this organization, I would remove the word volunteer and treat it as any other experience. If however you did occasional work or work you didn't learn from, I would leave it as you did above.

From personal experience

I volunteer to build a certain NPO's data infrastructure from the ground up. I find this work mentally stimulating, educational, relevant, and like any other FT employment. Thus, I'll include this in the experience section of my resume and not write volunteer next to it on my CV. If an employer asks, I'll tell him that it was in-fact a volunteer role. By leaving it off, the first impression of that role is as it should be: FT employment. Do note that my resume does not have an employment section and that this is by design.

I have also volunteered for the food-bank, my university, local homeless shelters, etc. None of these positions are particularly relevent and you won't even find them on my resume/CV. They don't contribute anything to my qualifications for a role.

Regarding phrasing

None of the provided examples communicate anything about the nature of your work. If you decide to include these roles in what I presume is a CV, you will need to add a few words indicating what you did for them. For example if I were to tweak your provided titlees (Depending on the context, "Volunteer" is entirely optional):

Volunteer Tech Support for Institute of Electrical Electronics Engineers (IEEE)
Volunteer Webmaster for the Project Management Institute (PMI)
Volunteer Teacher for the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR)

A Final Word on Honesty

It is exceptionally easy for an interviewer to know when you are "Valourizing" your experience. It would do to repeat that again. Humans are terrible at lying and your interviewer likely has at least a decade more experience than you.

Embellishment is okay to an extent and only you will know what that is for your role. I heartily support selective truth-telling (ie changing of job titles to communicate what you really did or removing irrelevant tasks from descriptions of roles), but I am careful that I never lie on my resume or CV.


Postdoc Proposal: Can I quote from viva examiners' report? Can I quote from a viva examiner's report some positive feedback in a postdoc application? If yes, how do I cite the report?

(Expanding my comment into an answer, as suggested by Bryan Krause.)

I think it'd be unusual, and I honestly feel a little weird about it. Perhaps it can be done well, but consider how it would look before doing so. If you're using the quote in support of claims in your research statement, I'd wonder a) is there no support in the literature for that claim (why?), or b) if you're not confident in your own claims. If you instead hope to use the quote in support of your abilities or talent, I think it'd be better to ask the report writer to also write one of your recommendation letters. After all, if they wrote so in the viva report, chances are that they highly enough of you and your work to write a good letter. (It'd also look a lot better on paper than "X said I'm awesome!")

The second aspect to consider is if the quotes can be verified. In the systems I'm somewhat familiar with, these reports are usually not publicly available - at least not easily so. This means that those reading your application would likely be unable to confirm that the quotes are valid, making the value of including them kind of dubious. What's more, the report writers might have an expectation that the report isn't made public, and might disapprove of you using their words this way. (Now, you could of course solve that by asking them, but again, if it's central to your application, a recommendation letter would make the point more convincingly.)

Finally, to address your second question: If you choose to do this, you could probably just cite it as company report or internal report, ideally adding a link if it's available online. If your university do make these reports public in a more official manner, it might also be classified as a technical report, but I sort of doubt it. Generally, however, exactly how you cite something in your application probably matters a lot less than what you cite.


minimum GPA for top math phd programs My question is pretty straightforward. I am just wondering what you think is the minimum GPA score that could keep me in good standing regarding my application for top math phd programs, such as Columbia, Princeton, MIT and Harvard, taking into consideration that I am currently enrolled at Columbia. Does the fact that I am attending an Ivy League school loosen up the implicit requirement of having a near perfect GPA? And what in general is considered a good median GPA to get into top math phd programs?

At that level, the only value for which there will be no issue is perfect marks, usually 4.0. But admissions, especially for top students to top schools doesn't work like that. More is considered than just GPA. Otherwise there would be no need for admissions committees.
You need a good, but balanced, application. And at the level you are speaking of, once you make the initial cut the non-quantitative things ae probably most important. What do your letters say about you? What research in field have you done? How is the quality of your insight? Do people actually like working with you. What do they predict will be your trajectory.
But "near perfect" is probably fine as long as the rest of it is here. At the margins, in selecting between a couple of candidates, it won't be GPA.
And coming from a good school doesn't hurt, but you need to do well there, just as you would at a "lesser" place. A "C" student from Yale isn't very impressive, I've been told. And lots of students are admitted from those lesser schools.

Actually, if you want better advice than you are likely to find here, ask any of your upper division professors whether you'd be likely to admitted to Columbia if you chose to continue there. Especially someone who has been involved in doctoral admissions in the past several years.


Relative importance of journal citations compared to classroom performance by academic field With regard to tenure decisions how drastic are the different weight placed on journal articles compared to teaching ability in the classroom?

I know some in the STEM fields that seem narrowly focused on research prior to obtaining tenure and others in other academic fields that seem to spend very little time on research.

Is the relative weight of importance really as drastic as it appears? Or is it exaggerated by those who have a bias one way or the other?

It doesn't depend on the field as much as the position. Consider three faculty members, all epidemiologists (my field):

One works at a school specifically focused on Masters of Public Health degrees. Research is done at the school, but as the MPH is primarily coursework based, with a single small project at the end, most faculty have a heavy student load.
One works at a major research university in a 50% hard money position, which comes with a teaching load of one graduate level class per semester.
One works in a 100% soft money research institute that does not offer any classes, and whose students come from other departments.

Note all of these could be at the same university.

Their tenure evaluations will weight things very differently. The first will probably be judged primarily based on their teaching ability, while the last likely hasn't taught at all, and may have actively been discouraged from doing so.

Where field comes in is what kind of positions exist, and in what proportion. For example, in the liberal arts, there are a large number of positions that are teaching centric, while medical schools often have a vast number of faculty whose positions will never involve teaching.


What is my institution when submitting to journal In the time between submitting the first draft of a paper to a journal and submitting the third and final version (now), my institutional affiliation has changed.  Should I indicate my original affiliation on my (latest) submission, or my current affiliation?  All the work for the paper was done while I was at the previous institution.

Ask the editor which they prefer, but (IME) the most common approach is to give your old institution (the one at the time of submission) and add a footnote saying "Now at...". An alternative would be to give two affiliations. Omitting your old affiliation entirely would seem strange.

(Bear in mind this may well vary substantially between disciplines, as with almost everything else! Again, if in doubt, ask the editor. It's their journal, after all...)


Listing an article which is under revision in your CV Background

I am a student applying for graduate fellowships. I recently got a decision from an editor regarding a paper I wrote, stating that the referees recommend acceptance, but that substantial changes need to be made to the paper first, and that I should submit a revised version.

This journal does not have a specialized submission system (though it is under a reputable press), and based on the phrasing I’m not 100% sure whether this can be considered a decision of “accepted with major revisions” or “revise and resubmit”.

Based on other questions on the site it seems that listing a paper under revision in the CV is not always appropriate, but that as a student in my situation it should be okay.

Finishing the revisions before the application deadlines is unfortunately not an option.

My question

What’s the best way to list this in my CV?

Followup: does the answer change if I can’t list it on a separate section from my other peer reviewed publications? (since some applicatons have space constraints for the CV)

What I thought about doing was to list it together with my other, published papers, in the format of:

MyName. (in revision). Paper title. Journal name.

It is not uncommon that a paper gets rejected after an "accepted with major revisions" and it will make a very negative impression if you get asked when your paper will be published after you got a rejection.

However, that should not prevent you from listing your pending submission, but better choose a modest phrasing. In this context, I have seen for example something like

  MyName. Paper title. Submitted to the International Journal of Foo.

or

  MyName. Paper title. Currently under review at the International Journal of Foo.

One reason to list your pending submissions can be to show what you have been working on in the last months, but it will not count as "achievement", even if you mention that it got an "accepted with major revisions".


What is the correct way to write a follow-up email in case the first one ended up in spam folder? It's been several weeks that I sent an email regarding to an open call for a position.
The position is advertised in a personal webpage with the message "[...] suitable candidates feel free to contact me," as opposed to the "job vacancies" page which the faculty has. There is no mentioned deadline.
I have mistakenly used my commercial email address instead of my academic email address.
I know that some people filter the incoming emails with respect to the domain name to reduce the number of spams in the primary inbox folder. I am afraid that this is the case.
So, I am considering to send a follow-up (duplicate) email to make sure that the email reached to the person. However, I am not sure how to word the email as I blindly assume that the person uses such filter.
Please note that I am perfectly fine with the idea of my assumption being wrong and the person choosing to ignore my email since I am not a good enough candidate. My concern is that I am a considerable candidate but I might have lost my chance because of some technical issue.
The best outline I have come up with is to write "(please ignore if duplicate)" in the subject, and blame my email provider in the first sentence, and then copy/paste the rest of the mail.
What is the least annoying way to recieve a potential duplicate email?

Do not send a duplicate email. Send a follow-up email, with the previous one at the bottom ("several weeks" is already long enough without even an acknowledgement of receipt). Send it from your other address without mentioning the spam issue.
If your email was indeed lost to a filter, this resurrects it, without being an annoyance in the opposite case. Out of the 1% of people who will notice the different sender address (assuming the name you configured to appear is the same in both accounts), 90% will not care and 9% will guess why.
(If you are not sure how to write that follow-up email, it is a different question, that likely has many duplicates at workplace.se).


Can good grades alone get me into grad school? I'm interested in going to grad school for a master's in computer science (I'm also applying to a MS/MBA program at a few schools). I have a 3.8 GPA from a highly regarded school, 99th percentile GRE scores, and not much else. I have no publications or research, minimal connections with professors, and my references will likely be only average. I do have some internship experience though. Should I bother?

I'm interested in going to grad school for a master's in computer science

There are two distinct types of masters degrees in computer science, at least in the US.

One is the professional masters degree, which is entirely course-based. Professional masters are considered terminal degrees; by pursuing such a degree you are cutting off (or at least drastically reducing) any future opportunity to join a PhD program. Also, professional masters students are rarely funded. You pay tuition, you take classes, you get your degree, and you leave, with a higher salary. High grades and test scores can definitely get you into these programs, even in top departments.

The other is the research masters degree, which requires some courses, but also includes a research component ending in a thesis.  Research masters programs are often used as preparation for, or even soft entry into, PhD programs. Thanks to an explosion of undegraduate CS majors, it's become much more common for research masters students to be funded.  Gaining admission to such a program, at least in top departments, usually requires more than just high grades and high test scores. You also need some evidence of research potential (which doesn't necessarily mean actual research experience).


Questions about Sociology Writing Sample I'm applying for a Ph.D. program in Sociology for Fall 2019. My background is in Computer Science, but I've attempted to build a competent resume by taking courses in my intended field and having relatively good grades in my non-major courses (philosophy, research methods, writing, etc.).

My query is related to writing samples. NYU requires a writing sample that, at maximum, should be 30 pages. While I have some great papers I wrote while at college, I'm wondering what it means to have a writing sample in your Ph.D application.

Do you write a sample from scratch, or do you simply make some changes to a paper you wrote in college? Are these samples supposed to be reviewed by a professor? If I write one from scratch, what's the recommended amount of time I should spend on it? I'm not looking to submit any applications before October, but not later than that, so I have about 4 months to write one and edit it.

Any advice would be useful. Thank you so much!

I would not suggest starting from scratch. I am assuming you do not yet have publications, (but if you do, you should definitely submit the paper that has already been published in an academic journal). If not, don't worry. The schools you are applying to are aware that you have not done any graduate level work before and they are probably not expecting you to deliver a published or publishable article, but rather your understanding and ability to convey your ideas clearly in writing. If the papers you wrote previously are relatively well written, you can refine/improve one of them and have an outside reader (not necessarily a professor, but it would surely be useful) to read it and give you feedback.

While you are refining your paper, you might want to look at published articles in Sociology and try to use them as a model to demonstrate your familiarity with the general disciplinary conventions.


During the defense, how to prove the method I used in my master thesis is correct? I will have my master thesis defense in one week and today my advisor wrote me he is not sure about a method I used to obtain a result (this will not ruin the entire work, but still will make some results useless).

I explained him the theory behind the method (which I found in a highly reccomended book, and I decided to apply after having written to the book's author to ask clarifications), but still he keeps raising doubts about it.

The fact is that now it is too late to change things, because the thesis has already been registered and anyway I do not understand why the method should be wrong. Therefore I stick to what is written in the book and to the explanation the author gave me.

I thought that maybe he just want to make sure I will be prepared to defend my work that day, but he is actually having words on the method itself, which is not something I have invented: I am just applying it as it was explained.

This is making me really anxious, because I do not know how to deal with this if such a question should be asked during the defense. I mean, I will give the same explanation, but what if someone insist on it?

This is not something you should get to your defense with your advisor still doubting. You and he need to sit down ASAP, work through the material, and not stop until he is satisfied. I would would hope that he would be willing to take this very seriously. No advisor should let a thesis go to a public defense with this kind of question looming in their mind. No one should be forced to do a defense that their advisor thinks they're not ready for.


Participation of multiple researchers in our project We have set up with colleagues in two other institutions a project that creates software prototypes for our discipline. We are creating the software prototypes so that we use them as stepping stones to a larger funding application. The prototype is online and can be accessed via a web browser.

One of the software prototypes is around collaboration. We think we have a good mechanism for collaboration with the potential for larger impact in the industry, but we would need to test it at scale. We think we should invite other researchers to test our prototype, and via testing, we would gain knowledge of its shortcomings and benefits.

I have looked at other disciplines that organise large collaborative projects and papers with co-authors in large numbers. I and my collaborators are wondering on how to set up the invite to the collaboration. Should we promise potential collaborators a stint in the forthcoming paper? From our perspective, this is the right thing to do, however, our discipline normally does not have mega-collaborations. Still, our prototype has the potential to involve a lot of people. On the other hand, would including them as part of an advisory group be enough?
Do you have any other insights on how and with which mechanisms to invite large groups of researchers to test and (in)validate your prototypes? What kind of intellectual recognition should those researchers receive?

Since professors of CS are often looking for collaborative tools for their students, you might be able to use them as a resource. The ACM has a special interest group for educators, SIGCSE, that maintains a mailing list of members. It frequently gets requests for research participation, so you might try to send a message there, though it requires membership. Other professional organizations may have some similar special interest groups that can be contacted.

Should you find a huge number of collaborators testers of your collaborative systems I wouldn't think that co-authorship would be necessary in most cases, though you might want a fairly long acknowledgement section in your paper. It would depend, of course, on how much they add to your work.


How do researchers from different institutions get to know each other to begin a collaboration? Quite often, graduate level research is done by researchers from different institutions, whether different universities or cooperation between a university and a private corporation.

How do the researchers get to know each other? How does the collaboration begin?

Go to a conference/workshop.  Ask intelligent questions in talks.  Talk to speakers afterwards.  (Have your advisor introduce you if you're shy.)  Eat lunch with them and their students.  Hang out in the hallways.  Talk about your research.  Listen to other people talk about their research.  Listen to gossip.  Throw in a few dirty jokes.  Grab some coffee, or beer.  Scribble on napkins.  Go out for dinner with the students.  Drink.  Play pool.  Try that new absinthe place around the corner.  Scribble on napkins.  Throw up in the alley. Stumble home.  Sleep.  Grab coffee.  Run into someone you met at the absinthe place.  Commiserate about your hangovers.  Talk about your research.  Scribble on napkins.  Have a good idea.  Skip the next four hours of talks.  Fly home.  Exchange drafts over email/github.  Chat on Skype.  Revise, revise, revise.  Submit to the next conference.  Repeat.

Very important: Do not skip the first 15 steps.


What is the role of a teacher (of mathematics) at university? Until now I've been completely focussed on research. I did serve as teaching assistant on some occasions, but I must honestly admit that I didn't give it much thought and my only concerns have been:

being clear and detailed (and slightly slow) in explanations;
being available for further clarifications;
being fair (and not particularly harsh) in evaluations.

These are, I guess, the characteristics that I value the most in a teacher. However, now, teaching will be a more prominent part of my career (although not at all the most prominent) and I will be assumed to have a sound "teaching philosophy". So I'd like to ask to experienced faculty (and also to students):

What is the role of a teacher of mathematics at university level?
What are the traits that are most commonly associated to good teachers? Should I read some research papers on pedagogy to find answers the question above and prepare myself to be a better teacher (and in the future also a good advisor and mentor)? Which ones do you suggest?
What research papers on pedagogy can I read in order to develop a "scientifically sound" point of view when it comes to grading, course design, presenting to students, solving exercises in class, and other aspects of a teacher's life?

I prefer to post this question here rather than on Mathematics Educators Stack Exchange because I really welcome remarks and answers from scholars (and students) working in other fieds too.

I'm a student. I have always wanted to be a researcher/scientist cum professor all my life. The following are the qualities I would like to be instilled in me (and a few which didn't turn out the way I expected from a teacher) as a teacher at a university level. Note that some of the points are applicable for teachers in general and some specifically for math teachers.

(The following are in no order of preference)

One of the most important things that a teacher must do is to use the blackboard and more than you use a powerpoint. There is some kind of magic related to using the board for math. One of my professors used to use powerpoints for his classes, and most of the time students (including me) fell asleep.
If in case you do want or have to use powerpoints, then make sure to create animations like the ones here. One of the fascinating things about those animations is how perfectly it fits to capture a person's attention.
Encourage students to use online resources like OCW MIT. When I was in my university (graduated this year), neither did I have internet connection, nor was I aware of such a resource online. Encourage and suggest MOOCs from Coursera, edX, etc. which might be relevant to your course. It is not necessary that they should register/complete every single course or resource. Give them two or three options and ask them to pick one.
Make it an active class. And make it fun too. I learnt a lot from Gilbert Strang and Mehran Sahami. Be enthusiastic in class, that will help students get out of their tiredness. You can also toss out chocolates like Sahami does when students answer/ask questions.
Solve problems in class - either all types of the same level (easy/medium/hard) or one type with all the levels, going from the easiest to the hardest. The point is to make sure they understand the problem solving process. In addition, solve example problems from the textbook or handout and for every example problem, give them a problem to solve either in class or as an ungraded homework. This makes sure they are actually doing something in a math class rather than just trying to consume the knowledge passively.
Make sure the subject you're taking can be related to other majors and fields. Most of the technical subjects have some variation of mathematics being used in them. Take Calculus. It is used everywhere, even when we think we don't need it. I always thought it was used only in continuous domains, mostly in physics and not at all in any other fields. I was mistaken. You don't have to make this a mainstream for your class. Maybe as an ungraded homework or just a casual mention when the relevant topic comes up is enough to keep the spark up.
Go a bit beyond the syllabus. I know this will be hard, but, just a bit will be enough. It may involve deeper concepts, real world applications, etc. That is up to you to choose. Personally, I have always found it beneficial for me to learn a bit more than what is needed so that I won't be caught off guard during exams. This also helps students if they wished to pursue higher levels of the course possibly leading to research.
Have a review class before exams. Walter Lewin's lectures had reviews for midterm and the finals. It sort of helps to review everything in class rather than spending extra time apart from the newer material to be learnt the day before exams.
Inform students exactly how many hours they'd need to spend on an avg outside class. I wound up with terrible time management because I had no idea how to allot the required time for each course. This led me to focus on subjects I loved and got better grades and subjects I didn't find interesting for which I didn't spend time - and I flunked in them. Huge mistake.
Use standard textbooks, especially the ones which have 4 and above ratings on amazon. Ask students if they liked a different textbook, and if it is a better suited one, then switch. Don't use textbooks which you find personally attractive.
If it is not a problem with your university rules, make sure attendance isn't compulsory. There will be at least one or two students who might find attending lectures boring. To counter that effect, make sure you deliver incredible lectures that makes students feel want to attend rather than have to attend. In my university 80% was mandatory and I found it a huge waste of time for most of my classes.
Make sure problem sets contain all levels of problems. It helps students to practice properly. This increases confidence. In addition, don't pick problems from the prescribed textbook. Just pick another textbook and give them the problems to solve. For math, I'm sure there are numerous books and resources online.
Identify the distribution of students in your class. There will be one/two/a few gifted students in your class. Maybe conduct a simple quiz at the end of week 1 or 2 to find out who they are. (I find it hard to explain it in words) As a teacher, you will know who these people are. Now, chances are that they might be bored if the class feels too easy. In this case, add extension problems which are very very challenging. These can be ungraded, but interesting to solve. These gifted students will always go out of their way to solve them. This ensures that their skills don't rust away with time. Another horrible experience of mine.
Rehearse for every class you take, fully. Practice. If it is a 50 min lecture, give a 50 min lecture to the empty hall. Walter Lewin used to do this for every lecture he gave (he quoted in an interview somewhere on OCW or YouTube, not sure where).

These are the ones off the top of my head. Hopefully, these are enough.


Difference between public and private university education Is there any noticeable difference between public and private university in US in terms of the education provided. Or, the only thing that matters is the way that universities are funded. For example private universities have huge amount of private donors where as public universities gets consistent funding from the federal government. Should the notion of public vs private is something that a student be concerned about.

Well, by definition, the difference is how much funding comes from the state government, but public universities do still get a good amount from donations.  But in my experience, there are qualitative differences in the educational environment at public versus private schools.  It's hard to explain these generally, as there's still a lot of variation among public schools or private schools, but here's my attempt at a few of these differences:

The student demographics are often markedly different.  For instance, private universities tend to be more expensive, thus public universities tend to be more attractive to students with less financial means.  There are some articles about how students in certain socio-economic classes are disadvantaged at going to places like Harvard.  Peer interactions generally play an important role in your education.
Private universities tend to be either small liberal arts colleges or elite research institutions.  Most state universities do not try to give a "liberal arts experierence," though of course some are more committed to teaching versus research than others.
The top state universities tend to be rather large, where as many top private schools are very small.  This makes a difference if you're looking for a small school with a more "personal touch."
There are also some private schools with religious affiliations, which may or may not be noticable in the education.  In general, private schools have more freedom in how they do things.


"Garbage in, garbage out" - Is it rude to call others' works as 'garbage' compared to ours? I'm working on a data model which, I think, produces more accurate and valid results than some of previous works by others, including my supervisor, who by the way supports my work. But so far, the relevant community in general hasn't paid enough attention to the need for such more accurate results in this field.

When presenting my work (verbal/poster/paper), I need to emphasise the importance of the problem and the need to using better models, and that if we used less valid models (such as some of the existing ones) we should expect less accurate results.

Is it rude to use the computer science axiom "garbage in, garbage out" (or similar phrases) when referring to others' works in this context?

Edit: I missed important details. In my case, by 'garbage' I specifically mean the low-quality data usually used to solve the problem, which makes other models less valid. Even though, I would never use it as it might be misinterpreted as evaluation of the works per se, rather than the resources used!

But I was surprised and not comfortable to read the analogy in a published comment which criticised another author's results for using unreliable data!

Yes, it's rude to describe somebody else's work as garbage, and unnecessarily so.  You've already said it much better yourself:

  if we used less valid models we should expect less accurate results

There's no reason to confuse this simple factual statement with a value judgement.  Just because something works poorly doesn't mean it's garbage---it may also simply be earlier and less well engineered.  Would you call a Model T "garbage" just because it gives inferior performance compared to a current car?


Should I leave my PhD after 3 years with a Masters? I am a current PhD student who just finished my third year in a Computational Biology program at a respected university, and I am looking for some advice. Basically, I am trying to decide whether or not I should stay in grad school.

I have finished all my coursework and my qualifying exams, and according to previously graduated students in my lab, I will most likely require 3 more years to graduate. If I left now, I would leave with my masters.

I have had thoughts about leaving my PhD throughout the years. But I have seriously been thinking about leaving the program for the past 6 months. When I first felt like quitting 6 months ago, I decided to sit on the feeling for a while because I realized that it will definitely affect my life long term. I also know that almost all PhD students want to quit sometime during their PhD, so it’s hard for me to know whether it actually would be the right decision. On a general level, I am doing well. I received my own grant and have made research progress. However, I have lately reached a point in my work where I am feeling stuck. This has increased my work load and pressure significantly, which has made me really push to think about whether the work is actually worth it, especially if I don’t want to do this in the future.

I started my PhD straight out of my bachelors degree, and I soon after realized what research actually is. I am a highly creative person who loves to dance, draw, design, teach, and cook.  I do like science, but I wouldn’t say that research is my passion. I have overall become very apathetic to research, as I feel like it squashes my creativity. My favorite part of research has been creating PowerPoints and presenting work. I feel that if I left and got a job in a different field that allowed me to be more creative, I would be much happier. My current work life has triggered mild depressive symptoms and panic attacks, for which I am now seeing a therapist.

As my project is at a critical point but in a competitive topic, I am facing intense pressure to work constantly. If I don’t take time for myself, my mental health deteriorates. When I do take time for myself, I do not work as long hours and cannot meet the high expectations. This cycle has not allowed me to take a step back and think about what I would like to do instead of a PhD in this field. I unfortunately feel like I wouldn’t be able to look for jobs seriously while I am in my current lab. I have thought about taking a break from my PhD, but I know that this will not go over well with my PI. Therefore, I don’t want to bring it up unless I’m fairly certain about leaving the program.

I know that if I left, I would be leaving a big opportunity behind, as I have already dedicated 3 years and am working under a well respected professor. However, I don’t feel that losing my mental health over a degree is worth it, even in the long run. To be completely honest, I am scared to stay because of how it will affect me mentally, and I am scared to leave because I am afraid that I may not be able to switch careers as easily as I thought. Plus, there may be no guarantee that my next job won’t induce this amount of stress, and I don’t want to regret my decision of leaving for the rest of my life.

I would like to hear advice from people who actually have left their PhDs. It would even be better to hear from those who quit and changed their field or those who quit a PhD in a related field. Is it a good idea for me to stick around, or should I move on and do something new?

Thanks for reading.
Sincerely,
Confused PhD student

I might be the person you're looking for an answer from. I left my PhD program in 2016 and took my Master's with me into the job market. I do not regret this decision.

When I was an undergraduate, I looked at the PhD as the ultimate life challenge and the ultimate accomplishment. I wanted to prove to myself I could do it even more than I wanted to make a career out of the PhD.

My first year of graduate school was shockingly hard. I struggled to adjust to the workload and I always felt dumber than my colleagues, even though they assured me they all felt the same. After a year, I adjusted, and even began to excel. I began to recognize the patterns of graduate school, and I developed a rhythm that helped me anticipate and overcome the major challenges.

After completing my Master's thesis, I started studying for the Qualifying Examinations. This was the period where I began to consider leaving the program altogether. Aside from one exam, the second half of the program was exactly identical to the first: I'd do a bit of traveling for research, I'd spend long hours writing my dissertation, and I'd continue to TA and run summer courses.

At this point I was absolutely confident I could finish the PhD if I wanted to. I had already published three books (as a hobby, unrelated to academia), so I was certain I could complete the long-term project of dissertation writing. In fact, one night I counted out all of the pages of research I had written for articles and papers in the past two years, and the number totaled right around the average length of a doctoral dissertation in my field. Writing and research was not going to be a problem.

But completing the program would require another 3 years of my life, and I was already approaching my 30s. My fiancee had been working for years and had her career already built up. She was making real money while I was living off of TA stipends and begging random institutions for grant money. With my income, we weren't going to be able to have a family, buy a house, live the American dream, etc. Our lives were just on hold.

Then I began hearing the horror stories of PhDs struggling to find jobs. Every recent grad I knew, regardless of major, couldn't find work because our university wasn't a top 10. The only exception were the CS majors, who had no problem securing gainful employment. But my housemate, for example, a man who completed his Chemistry PhD by contributing to a new HIV drug, was unable to find a job for two years after he finished.

In the end I had to make a value judgment: was my pride worth my family's future? The answer was no. So I left. My advisor abandoned me (she won't even respond to my happy holiday emails that I occasionally send to my former professors) and some of the guys in my cohort probably considered me a washout. But I've got a happy marriage, a great job, and I'm buying a house within the next two years, so. I got what I wanted out of the experience, and I feel like I stopped at the right time.

I strongly recommend you prioritize your mental health above everything else in your life. Because if you don't have that, then you have nothing. All the money and job security in the world won't make you happy, and therapy might not put you back together. The thing about the PhD is that you have to be 1000% committed to that vision of your life. If you aren't really interested in research, and if you always feel in your heart that you don't want to be there...maybe you should listen.

Before you leave your program, consider taking a Leave of Absence, which is totally acceptable and common, especially for mental health-related reasons.

edit:

One more question for you to answer for yourself: Is there any additional benefit to having the PhD instead of just the Master's? Usually the MS is plenty for landing a job in the corporate sector, and the PhD is if you want to do full-time research (which you obviously don't) or lecturing as a professor (which you didn't mention).


Is getting a good grade enough to ask for a letter of recommendation for a grad school application? I'm about to start a 5th year Master's program in CS at my university (one extra year after B.S. for a M.S.). I've also been looking at applying to grad schools for a PhD program, and the main thing that I've been worried about is recommendation letters.

I know one professor somewhat well (took two classes with her, one of which was a project class where I presented to her) and I think she would be willing to write a rec letter. However, she's fairly well known in her field and I don't know if that makes it harder to get a rec from her.

But, most of the colleges I'm looking at for grad school need three letters. I've had good grades throughout my undergrad, mostly 3.9 and 4.0s. Because I was fairly comfortable with my classes, I rarely went to office hours. As a result, I don't think any of the professors who've taught me know anything about me other than that I was in their class and that I did well.

I'm totally unsure now about how to proceed. Is it normal for professors to be asked for rec letters by students they only maybe recognize? Do they usually say yes or no? What are my options?

The only guarantee is that if you don't ask, you don't get the letter. So ask.

I'm sure your situation is common in large places and it is good to find ways to "stand out" with at least a few professors as you go along, but that is too late for you now if time is short.

But ask in person, during office hours, and be prepared to remind the professor of your past association even if it is only a little. If you ask by email it is too easy to just say no, sorry. But if you get turned down in person you might also get some advice about how to proceed (along with the disappointment).


How to address contradictory comments from two reviewers? I have got reviews for a Survey paper in IEEE Communication Surveys and Tutorials.
I have got contradictory comments from two reviewers (R-I and R-II)
The first reviewer R-I says that the tutorial part (Section III, and IV) is too lengthy and the Survey is too short (Section V). He asked me to shorten the tutorial and expand Section V. The other reviewer R-II, on the other hand, says to shorten Section V? How can I address this? I do not want to shorten and remove important bits in Section V. Can I mention to the R-II that "I have been asked by R-I to expand this Section and since it is a survey, we tried to cover a large part of the topic" ?

While the other question noted by GoodDeeds may answer your question, let me note that the paper remains yours. The editor has probably seen the reviewers and is aware (or should be) of the contradiction.
I think the two reviewers had different needs. One had the knowledge so didn't need the tutorial and the other wanted to be informed generally. Think about that and about the balance, but the paper is yours. Think about whether there are really two papers here, though a tutorial alone might not be enough for publication.
The proper way (IMO) to respond to reviewers is to edit the paper taking their views into account, but not necessarily taking every bit of advice, which is impossible here in any case. And your suggestion about a response to the second reviewer is more appropriately sent to the editor.
Since it is the editor who will make the decision here, ask them for advice about the tutorial material and how including/excluding it from the paper would affect the decision to publish. Let the editor argue with the reviewers if necessary.


Is there any software to regularize British vs. American spelling in a text? This is a minor but ongoing annoyance that takes up more time than I would like, and I am wondering if anybody knows of a solution.  I often write papers with foreign collaborators, and we tend to end up with a mixture of British and American spellings of words in our text.  We know it's a problem, and often agree on which to use ahead of time, but it's so ingrained one often doesn't even realize when you've made a mistake.  Thus, in the final proofing stage, somebody has to go through and manually regularize the spelling, which is really boring and time-consuming.

My question is this: does anybody know of software that can help automate this process?  It feels to me like it should exist, but I don't know of any...

Yes. There is an add-in for Microsoft Word called myWriterTools that will convert US to UK English and vice-versa. It also highlights changes so you can double-check. It isn't free however.

Alternatively you could use CTRL + A to select all your text in the existing document and set the proofing language to your desired version of English. This will then show the majority of errors as incorrect spelling (be wary of words such as license and licence though which may be used in different contexts) in Word.

Compass in a comment has mentioned an online converter US2UK that may be useful for shorter documents.

I have searched for a LaTeX equivalent but it would appear one does not exist currently.


Difference between International edition of a book and a non international one Most of the textbooks  I used during my undergraduate studies (outside north America) are International editions, so what is the difference between a national and an international edition of a book?

For example, I have a book that says

  XYZ published this special edition for the benefit of students outside the United States and Canada.

and they don't mention why this international edition is special or what is the benefit!

International editions are cheaper

They are sold cheaper, in English speaking countries (or countries with education in English) outside North America: India, China, etc. The content is equal to that of US/North American versions.

There are two reasons why they are cheaper:

because they are printed in cheaper version: paperback instead of hardcover, sometimes black and white
because the publisher knows he cannot sell them at their US price anyway, so they are willing to sell them at the price people will buy them (better to sell them cheaply than not at all)

Sources:

http://www.thetextbookguru.com/2011/04/20/international-textbook-editions-a-cheaper-alternative-2/
http://www.abebooks.com/books/Textbooks/international-editions.shtml
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080825164810AAGRN80

There was also a case about import of international edition textbooks in the US supreme court last year (http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/03/thai-student-protected-by-first-sale-supreme-court-rules/).


My advisor rejects my idea, but claims that the modified version is hers. What should I do? I am a junior PhD student in electrical engineering and I need ideas about how to handle my mentor. Whenever I go to her with an idea she rejects it saying it is wrong or not interesting. But after a few months she comes back with a slightly modified version of my earlier idea and takes credit for the full idea. She asks me to do experiments with her version of my idea. Then when we have results, she publishes them in a conference (includes me as an author), but she gives the talk at the conference saying she came up with the idea and I only did experiments.

I don't want to stop working with her because I have been working with her for two years and leaving will set me back by at least one and a half years. Can you suggest how to avoid this?

I suspect the advisor is relative young and probably not fully even aware of the problem. Her perception of events may be completely different. She may feel that she contributed the essential part of the idea to make it valuable. She may not even remember that the idea came from you originally. But that does not mean that she shouldn't be corrected and give credit to you.

This can probably be solved by communicating with her, or by communicating with someone more senior, who could have a talk with her. Are there any annual progress meetings where this could be done?

Not dealing with the problem will only exacerbate it.


Have technical reports been subsumed by preprints? As someone who has recently gotten into the research world, I read a lot of preprints and occasionally dig up some technical reports to access older publications.

To me, it seems like technical reports were the paper version of preprints. Many technical reports appeared later as peer-reviewed articles or chapters of books. Nowadays, there are far fewer technical reports appearing. My department used to produce multiple dozens each year in the 70s and 80s, but they have only produced one so far this year.

Does this mean that preprints have taken the place of technical reports? Is there any reason why a researcher would choose to publish a technical report with their university or organization?

While preprint archives certainly remove one of the major reasons that I used to submit technical reports, sometimes I find there's just no other appropriate title for a work.

To me, the whole notion of a preprint assumes intention to eventually publish in a journal, using a journal-style format and style of argumentation. There are a number of things that I write, however, that are worth archiving in citable form that just are not that.

In my own work, for example, I often end up producing formal project reports for funding agencies.  These may incorporate material from papers or that will later be extracted for papers, but the report itself can be a valuable document, especially for talking about implementation details or negative results.

Likewise, highly technical documents such as specifications, architecture documents, standards, best practices recommendations, etc., can be extremely valuable, but are often not appropriate to publish as journal articles.  One often also writes journal articles about such things, but there is a big difference between an article explaining the core concepts and value in a standard versus the full grinding detail of its complete specification.

I'm sure there are other examples as well, but the bottom line is this: "technical report" remains a nice catch-all name for any archival technical artifact that's a written document but not a journal article.


Ethics of take home tests I am in a professional evening program, it is full of students like myself that have full time jobs. Recently we had a professor give us a take home exam that said "no collaboration, no internet usage" (this is because the program is very compressed and doesn't have time for in class exams). When I talked to people about the exam, the first thing out of their mouth was "I'm going to use the internet, that requirement is ridiculous". In my personally opinion no one is going to take the time to exclude themselves from a tool that they use every day because a professor says so.

The professor is quite experienced, but spend a lot of his recent career in administration instead of teaching and is just getting back to being a lecturer.

All courses in this program are curved, so it is disadvantageous to not do what all other students are doing. I would like to let the professor know that his teaching style is very out of date and that saying "no internet" on a take home is guaranteed to be ignored, and frankly doesn't make sense given how modern people learn. (I'm a programmer by trade so if they told me "no internet" at work they might as well fire me)

I don't think that giving a takehome where one asks for no internet is at all unreasonable. At the same time, such an exam should have some precautions against internet use. When I've given takehomes I've generally made sure that the problems didn't turn up with 5-10 minutes of Googling. That said, if this is enough of a problem that students are discussing this, the best thing to do maybe to drop the professor a note and let them know what other students are doig.


Is it OK to edit my undergraduate thesis results? I'm current an undergraduate student working on a research project for my thesis.

In my project, I obtained quite a large number of inconsistent or strange result for my lab analysis of my samples and I just couldn't get a reliable or sound result for my analysis. I have been struggling in repeating the experiments for a prolonged time and done a lot of attempts, yet I still have not got a good result for it.

While my viva session and thesis submission date is approaching nearer, I am really stressed and have thought about modifying my lab results so that it is more presentable for my thesis since time is running out.

However, I really am not sure whether that is it ok for me to do so. I got a guilty feeling that I am doing something that is against my morality for submitting results that are not 100% originated  from my own work. On the other hand, if I report my original results that didn't look appealing for my supervisor, I'm also afraid that she would require me to redo my whole experiment and delay my graduation date.

I really hope I can get an advice from a reliable researcher or student about my case.

I am really stressed up and conceived the notation of modifying my lab results so that it is more presentable for my thesis since time is running out.

No, no, no

Never do this - it is highly unethical. If your deceit is discovered, you are likely to lose your degree, and may possibly face other consequences. (For example, if you have a job based on that degree, you may lose the job when the degree is revoked.)

It is always disappointing when a project doesn't work out the way you hope it will, but there is always that risk when you set out to do something that isn't completely straightforward.  See, for example, this related question: What to do when research leads to poor results?

Even experiments that are "known" to work (in the sense that someone claims to have previously achieved "good results" with that experiment) can't always be repeated reliably. See Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science, in which the authors attempt to repeat 100 published psychology experiments, and "replicated the original result" in fewer than half of them.

The correct response is to
write your thesis giving all the details of your work as it happened: the background, the experiment design, and the results. This serves to document your efforts, and may prove to be useful to other people who might try the same experiment in the future. You may also explain why you think the experiment may not have yielded the results you expect, and possibly propose a new experiment (if you have any ideas for improving your work).

Note that even when scientific findings do not match our expectations, the study is still considered a success (of sorts) if we can learn something from it. Even if what we learn is "this experiment does not yield consistent results in many cases." In contrast, false results might look nice, but are worse than worthless.

A lack of "good results" does not necessarily doom your thesis. To quote another answer:

  My PhD thesis was trying to demonstrate the nature of the relationship between stress and psoriasis symptoms (many people say "stress worsens psoriasis" - it's taken as a given truth, but it's never been empirically demonstrated). I was trying to answer things like what kind of stress, how long does it take, does it differ between people? I never found any evidence that stress did worsen psoriasis. Nor that psoriasis worsened stress (or any other psychological symptom).

  A PhD is an educational process. One should demonstrate that one has learned. The most important thing about a PhD is showing what you know, what you have learned, and what you understand. If anyone gets to the end of a PhD and says "Well, those results were all positive, just as I expected", they've learned little. At the end of your PhD (or any research project) you should want to start again, and this time do it properly.

The excerpt above is about a PhD, but applies at all levels of study.

  If I report my original results that didn't look appealing for my supervisor, I'm also afraid and doubt that she would require me to redo my whole experiment and delay my graduation date.

You should talk to your supervisor now - don't surprise her the week before your submission date and tell her that the experiment failed! Talk to your supervisor and ask for her advice on how to proceed with your experiment. Presumably she has more experience than you in this area and may be able to suggest a solution you haven't thought of. (And she probably does not want to delay your graduation any more than you do...)


How to approach experts to get feedback on a paper I'm a PhD student in pure maths at a university in Europe. For reasons that I won't go into, my research interests do not coincide with my supervisor's ones. This means that, although she gives me good general advice, she can't give me more "technical" feedback on my work. I've now written a complete first draft of my first paper, and I'd like to get some external feedback before thinking of submitting it to a journal. My question is:

  What is the best way to approach the experts in my field (for whom I am a complete stranger) to politely ask if they can read my paper and give some feedback on it?

Emailing, of course, would be the preferred means of communication, so suggestions on how to structure a potential email to send to the experts are very welcomed.

Generally it's considered okay to e-mail researchers who you don't know and share your work with them. This is especially true if you are a student.

Be conservative about it -- pick only a few people whose research interests align closely with the paper you're writing. (For example, whose work are you citing?) Don't e-mail famous people just because they're famous.

That said, I think that asking for detailed feedback might be seen as presumptuous. Rather, just tell them that you would like to share your work with them, describe it very briefly, and say something like "If you have any comments I would be grateful to hear them."

Probably most people will ignore your message. (They have no obligation whatsoever to read your message or respond.) Maybe one or two will write back with general feedback or suggestions, and if you are very lucky you might get some detailed feedback. What you might realistically hope for is a response along the lines of "Thanks, this looks interesting, you might be interested in X, Y, and Z" which at least gives you some related works to check out.


Can I list tentative invited talks on my CV? I am a graduate student in mathematics currently applying for jobs in the US, mostly at small liberal arts institutions.

I have accepted an invite to give a talk at a school in mid-November.  May I list this talk on my current CV and expect people to realize that as it's dated "November 2016," it is scheduled but has yet to happen?  Do I need to mark it as tentative?  Or should I simply leave it off?

In terms of status-enhancement or proof of merit, the actual giving of the talk is of almost no consequence. The invitation is the thing that "proves" status and merit (such as they may be). So, yes, list it, all the more considering that you probably don't have many such episodes to put on your CV.

For that matter, if you yourself had some (unfortunate, presumably) reason to cancel from your end, still, you did get the invitation.

From their end, to cancel your talk after issuing the invitation would be a fairly severe gaucherie... so I'd bet it won't happen. Even if it did, almost-surely the official reason would be some funding problems, not that they've discovered that you're a poseur and a bad person, etc. So the status and virtue leading to the original invitation are not diminished.

Being invited to give presentations is a kind of proof of one's relevance to the research community.

There are rumors of "an internet", supposedly allowing easy, massive, long-distance asynchronous communication without the expenses and perils of long-distance personal travel, but until that possibility is assimilated into the academic community... much like the notion that "publication" could mean literal publication, rather than running a status-and-merit gauntlet... :)

Joking (???) aside, it's not the literal giving of the talk, and is not the literal publication in refereed journal, that confer status or prove merit, but the invitation (resp. acceptance).