In astronomy, would it be possible to continue doing postdocs for up to 15 years to increase your chance of getting a permanent position? I heard that in astronomy most people do only one or two postdocs. If they haven't found a permanent position after this, they quit astronomy and find a job in a different field like physics, economics, or information technology. And the vast majority of people who get a PhD in astronomy will end up quitting astronomy because the astronomy is one of the hardest field to get into.

But suppose that your parents were rich and provided you with more than enough money to live for as long as you wanted, which means that you have no pressure to quit your postdocs to get a job in a different field than astronomy in order to earn more money.

Would it be possible to continue doing postdocs after postdocs for up to 15 years (so up to 6 postdocs) to increase your chance of getting a permanent position compared to those who only do one or two postdocs?

Or would doing more than 2 postdocs not increase your chance of getting a permanent position anymore? Maybe all employers reject people who do more than 2 postdocs because they all see them as failures, no-good, incompetent and unskillful?

This question to some extent revolves around a purely semantic issue, namely what is a postdoc? Many areas in academia have a small number of "soft money" research positions that a researcher can hold, sometimes for many years. When a researcher has an independent source of funds and doesn't need to be paid, I imagine that can only improve his/her ability to obtain such positions. The questions that need to be discussed in connection to your question are therefore:

(a) Do such positions qualify as "postdocs"?

(b) Is there a chance for a researcher holding such a position for up to 15 years to eventually transfer to a tenure track position?

I'm not in astronomy, but from a general STEM perspective I would argue that the answer to (a) is no, and the answer to (b) is yes.

Specifically, with regards to (a), the point is that "postdoc" is not a technical term (at least not one whose definition is universally agreed upon), but an informal label we apply to an interim position a researcher holds for a few years after finishing their PhD and before finding a permanent/tenure-track position. Talking about someone being a postdoc for 15 years is an oxymoron, as it stretches the term way past its conventionally understood meaning. Linguistically it would be like talking about a "50 year old child."

With regards to (b), I think it is indeed very possible for a researcher to transition to a faculty position from any other type of position, provided they have been doing high quality work. An extreme case (but not necessarily the only case) would be a researcher who makes a single very important scientific discovery that propels them to scientific stardom. I would imagine that it is absolutely possible for this to happen to a non-faculty researcher in astronomy. Whether it's likely to happen is a completely different story of course, but given that the premise of OP's question is that landing a faculty position in astronomy is already highly unlikely even in the normal way, I don't see why this approach is any less likely to work than the more conventional one.

To summarize, my (non-astronomy-specific, as I said) opinion is that although a soft money researcher may suffer from a certain minor stigma when it comes to applying for faculty positions, this by itself will almost certainly not be a deal-breaker, and when it comes to being evaluated for such positions, to a good degree of approximation everything would depend on the work they have published.


How should one respond to 'Call for Paper' e-mails? Of late I have been receiving a number of e-mails with subject 'Call for Paper' and invitations to contribute to new and/or open-access publications. While most of them immediately qualify for the trash bin, some do have a professional looking layout and language. Sometimes their publisher name looks very similar to reputed publishers.

Should I create a filter to delete and mark spam for all mails with 'Call for Paper' in the subject?

Do reputed publishers ever advertise or invite authors to contribute to their journals?

Every conference and workshop will issue a call for papers. The editors of special issues of journals may issue a call for papers. Editors of books on a special topic may have call for papers. How else will they advertise their conference, workshop, journal, book and get submission?

Many of these will be perfectly legitimate and even highly reputable venues. Naturally, some of these might be poorly ranked conferences or even in-it-for-the-money ventures, rather than serious scientific venues. But if you mark them all as spam, how will you know what is out there to submit your papers to?

The best strategy I can think of is to create a folder to collect these call for papers and use a filter to move them into that folder. When you need to submit a paper, you can search through the folder to find an appropriate venue. As most conferences repeat yearly at roughly the same time, you can collect the names of those and the approximate due dates in another file (or calendar), so that you build a good picture of what the major events in your field are.

Every now and again you will need to find a new forum or perhaps there will be a book that you could contribute to. By filtering all call for papers, you miss these things.

On the other hand, you can find most of this information using Google ....

Answering the title question: generally you shouldn't respond to these emails. That said, you could send an email to be asked to be removed from the mailing list, but this is probably ineffective.


Is it standard for US-based universities to consider the ethnicity of an applicant during PhD admissions? In the upcoming Fall (Fall 2019), I will be applying to CS PhD programs at some of the top research universities in the United States specialising in artificial intelligence.

While I cannot speak for other fields, I know that in my field (artificial intelligence), there has been a major push to increase the diversity of practitioners in the field. Here are a few articles about this diversity initiative:

Article about lack of diversity in the field of AI:
https://www.technologyreview.com/s/610192/were-in-a-diversity-crisis-black-in-ais-founder-on-whats-poisoning-the-algorithms-in-our
Tweet thread by CS admissions chair at Cornell discussing diversity initiatives: https://twitter.com/davidbindel/status/992165303747461122?lang=en
Tweet thread by PhD candidate at University of Toronto (a top school in AI) clarifying the importance of diversity in the field: https://twitter.com/leeclemnet/status/1040030107887435776

There are many other initiatives such as conferences at NeurIPS (typically regarded as one of the top 3 conferences in AI) that has workshops exclusively for members of underrepresented groups. I'm not sure what exactly the workshops entail, but here are the links to the relevant organizations: Black in AI, Women in Machine Learning, LatinX in AI.

The impression I get is that a lot of the talk around diversity tends to revolve around some key physical identifiers such as ethnicity and sex/gender; although perhaps I have not looked broadly enough at the full scope of diversity initiatives in the field and there may be initiatives that revolve around things like socioeconomic background, geographic background and national origin.

I can understand that when individuals of a particular ethnicity (such as African-Americans) and individuals of particular sex (such as women) are particularly underrepresented in the higher echelons of the field, people begin asking questions as to why that is; since, after all, ethnicity and sex should not be predictors of success in the field yet they clearly are.

Question

I'm an African student studying at a university that is ranked in the top-10 globally on both the Times Higher Education and QS rankings, and am planning on submitting some PhD (CS) applications to some of the top unis in the US in the upcoming fall. Given the preoccupation with diversity by practitioners in my field (in both industry and academia), I'd like to know to what extent my ethnicity will factor into the admissions decisions of committees in the US.

If there is one thing that academia is particularly bad at, it is transparency in decision making. Why do some people get admitted and not others? Why are some people hired and not others? Why are some people promoted and not others? From the bottom to the top of academic hierarchy, you'll be hard-pressed to ever get a straight answer, and answers you do get are always suspect because the nature of human decision-making is itself complex and opaque. There are plenty of reasons for this, from self-protection from criticism and gaming of the system, to rapidly changing criteria based on past experience and argument, to the fact that so much of the decision making is based on subjective ratings provided by individuals (often down to individual faculty members deciding if they want to work with a student).

To cut to the heart of your question, while it is not any sort of prescribed standard at the graduate level, you can safely assume race, ethnicity, national origin, and gender will be in some way be "taken into account" by some committees and individual professors. In many states this is actually illegal, explicitly forbidden by law - you can still assume it will sometimes happen anyway. On the other hand, some people will simply ignore demographic factors to the extent they are physically able, regardless of what they are told to do. As Universities have a history of avoiding transparency in admissions, you are extremely unlikely to ever know when it was considered, how much effect it had, whether it was positive or negative, and whether it ended up materially effecting the decision to admit you or not. You cannot know, they will basically never tell you, they will tend to go out of their way to avoid writing it down, and it is common for many people in the process to not even know with any certainty what factors ultimately "mattered".

However, from what I've seen on the inside and the outside of academia and from talking to fellow academics, you can safely assume at the graduate level that other factors matter way, way more. It is simply too high-stakes a decision for most schools to be altruistic, and they tend to steadfastly refuse to intentionally admit people who are utterly unqualified simply because of some demographic fact about them. The vast majority of Universities will only admit you if they think you will do well there, because having a bunch of under-performing students who are radically unqualified to pursue research and teaching is an albatross around the neck that few graduate schools will willingly tolerate. This is even more true at the PhD level, because they aren't cashing in on tuition (which is heavily marked up for international students, because money), so performance is king.

From talking to people working on diversity initiatives, I'll also give you another important insight: the diversity initiatives you hear about are not actually a preoccupation of the majority of faculty and staff, for good or ill. According to people working on actually making these initiatives successful, they report that the vast majority of people mostly want to ignore the issue and focus on other things, and so they work so very hard to make the initiatives public and heavily seen because otherwise they feel they will be unable to make any changes and they will be crushed by the majority weight of indifference mixed in with a heavy dose of active hostility to their efforts. Higher ed can look monolithic from the outside - but on the inside it is highly factious, and what appears as consensus is often a thin facade.

Because of all the above, the only advice I think makes any sense is treat the process as any other student should: apply broadly, see what offers you get, and talk with prospective advisors about what they are interested in. You are welcome to ask them if they were involved in your admission decision and then ask them why they wanted to admit you; I did that, and while it can feel a little awkward at first, a little bit of humor makes it easier and most professors when questioned directly, sincerely, and politely gave very direct answers. Some even said what parts of my profile they thought were a concern, and what other parts they thought would be a strength. Everyone gave wildly different answers, there was no consistency - no two people see the same person the same way.

Once you've got all your offers and finished talking with people, you can make your decision then on what seems like the best opportunity for you.


What is the status/reputation of the University of South Africa (UNISA)? I would like to follow PhD studies in my field of Computer Science. The problem is that I have to work in my native country. I have read that this university, UNISA, is known because of their online Master and Doctoral studies.

The question that I have is because I see different comments from people from United States or Europe that wanted to enter into this online degrees. Does anybody have experiences or know if that university is worldwide recognized? Or would it be only a waste of money and time? In case of the latter, which institution of quality offers online PhD degrees in CS?

Consider that this question is not focused locally, because as I mentioned in the aforementioned paragraph; there are people from all over the world that want to take those UNISA degrees.

I offer the following evidence from credible and official sources against doing a PhD in Computer Science at UNISA:

Low graduation rates:  17 doctoral students graduated from the College of Science, Engineering, and Techonology (which includes the PhD in Computer Science degree) in 2010, 2011, and 2012 combined. Compare this to the 99 doctoral student enrollments five years earlier in 2005, 2006, and 2007 (combined). Graduation rates are expected to be somewhat low for distance learning students, but rates this low are a bad sign. (PDF source)
Inadequate supervisory capacity: The school admits that "many [research] areas in the School of Computing have reached supervisory capacity" and says that "long waiting lists started forming due to lack of supervisors," which is another worrying sign.  (Same source)
Very, very low research output: Research output is arguably the most important indicator of a reputable PhD program. On this page, 6 professors in the School of Computing (which offers the PhD in Computer Science degree) are listed as having openings for PhD students. I looked up the Google Scholar and/or DBLP profiles of these 6 (for those that had them) and consulted personal pages of the rest to get a sense of their research productivity.

Averages across two years (2012 and 2013), the number of publications per person per year was 0.58 on average (range of 0-1.5)
Of the 7 publications I found for these professors in 2012 and 2013, 3 were in conferences or journals with the name "Africa" in the title (i.e., not international venues). So the average publication rate per person per year in non-local venues was 0.33.


Include personal scripts & algorithms in scientific paper as the title said I want to include a lot of scripts I wrote in scientific paper but how I do that do I upload them In GitHub & then cite them or include them as additional materials at the end of the paper.
Thank in advance

Yes to both, though providing code through a service like GitHub may be preferable as you can obtain a citable DOI and your readers will know where to find updated code, if any. Figshare is another option. Providing code in your supplement can provide redundancy, especially if you would like readers to cite your paper when they use your code. See Rule 8 under these Ten Simple Rules for Taking Advantage of Git and GitHub for more details.


How do I ask to draft recommendation letters for my references? My references for my graduate program applications include an adjunct professor and an industry professional (both not very academic) and I am not sure if they really have time to invest in writing the recommendations for me, although I am pretty sure they will write for me if I asked them to.

I heard that often time the reference would ask the students to draft the letter before they even edit and send away online because they are usually busy and really don't give a damn on your application or simply because they haven't written any recommendation before. So I wonder if it is okay to just ask in the first place something like "I can also draft the letters for you if you don't have time (Are there better ways to express this request?)" when I reach out to my references to write the recommendations for me?

Another good thing about this is I can basically write in a way that includes what I think the admission committee would consider valuable in my letter. I mean, after all, I know about my program much better than my references, and I know how to better phrase my experience to make them relevant.

Short of asking to draft the letter (which many letter writers consider inappropriate), you can simply ask the letter writer to address particular issues in your letter.   You should also supply copies of your resume, academic transcripts, and any statement of purpose that you've written so that the letter writer can tailor the letter to support your application.

For example, you might say something like (to your industry professional), "I think that your letter could help by commenting on my work habits and skills in software development.  As you can see, I'm particularly interested in doing a dissertation related to machine learning, so you might also address my experience in machine learning at XYZ corp."


How to ask for lettler of recommendation from supervisor when he would be interacting very little with me? I am an undergraduate student in my final year and started doing my bachelor's thesis in a research lab. My official thesis supervisor is head of the lab, and a highly experienced expert and equally busy person. He has assigned a junior Professor and a PhD student as my direct points of contact.

I will be applying for masters in another university in a year and would need letter of recommendation from the head of the lab. But, since the interaction with him would be very minimal (2-3 meetings in 6 months), how can I ask him for the letter of recommendation? Also, is there anything I can do at this point in time to get the strong letter from him later?

The solution seems fairly simple. At your next meeting with this professor, or one you can arrange sooner rather than later, let him know of your future plans and that you will eventually want to ask him for a letter. Make a special request that he "follow your work" enough that he can write such a letter. But also ask hime for advice about how to be a success in the project and to prepare yourself for later academic work.

The goal is just to get him to notice you even if you aren't interacting much. But, of course, this assumes that your work will be very good overall so that there are only good things to say about you when the time comes.

It is helpful for a professor to know that students have certain aspirations beyond the current project/course/degree. Make him aware early on, rather than later.


How do I go about writing a review? I'm an agronomy major who's performing additional academic work as way of increasing my chances of getting into grad school.

This semester I'm going to be writing a literature review regarding plant breeding in ornamental plants using references from 2007 to the present year. The emphasis will be in breeding methodologies ((1)mutagenesis, (2) genetic transformation) and (3) biodiversity.

My professor has done extensive research in genetics but this is also the first time he's advising a student in writing a review. Out goal is to make it as publishable as possible.

I've already obtained multiple articles but this is my first time writing a review. Can I get advice on how to start or how to plan my creation process?

First, you'll need to identify what kind of reviews you're planning to write. Just to name a few: critical review, integrative review, literature review, meta-analysis, scoping review, systematic review, etc. The methods differ somewhat regarding the types. For example, if you're writing a systematic review, then you'll need a much heavy focus on how you searched for the articles and how you sorted/selected them.

Second, most reviews are question-driven and according to the types, the specificity of the questions also differ. Scoping reviews may have a looser definition of questions while meta-analysis and systematic review may have a set of tightly defined questions.

In other words, it's likely not something we can introduce on a Q&A website like here. As a "review" varies so much that can be as quick as an afternoon of search or a five-year PhD project.

What I'd recommend:

Identify about 5-8 review articles in your field that you'd like to model after. Most reviews are pretty apparent in terms of what type of reviews it is. But if you're unsure, talk to a librarian.
Read up about that kind of review. There are books (like Booth's Systematic Approaches to a Successful Literature Review) and guidelines (check www.equator-network.org) on how to carry out the search, arrange ideas, and present your interpretation. Again, your library would be a great start.
Consider working with someone who had experience in writing a review. They can help you with revising subtle things like how to tabulate the data to make them digestible and useful, and how to present your findings, etc.
Budget a lot of time.
Develop a system of keeping good notes and bibliography. People have used index cards, highlighters, Evernote, etc. to keep their thoughts and their quotes clearly laid out and discernible from each other. Bibliography management software is also a must, as there will be intensive referencing.
If you have tuition remission/support, consider register for a course in your school on literature review. Most of these courses require students to have an independent project (you may petition for one if there isn't.) That way you can get to work on your topic and obtain guidance and input from the course instructor. I think 13 to 14 weeks of weekly effort should get you a very strong draft. (According to your school policy you may want to give the instructor a heads up and seek approval on using your research topic, though I don't see any conflict here.)

What I'd privately recommend:

Evaluate if you truly need a review. While I understand it sounds logical to "read up and write about the field" before you joint in. It's true that it's easy to read a lot of articles about a field, yet it takes time/experience to be able to tell the intricacy among them. So, most reviews take a much, much longer time to write compared to, say, writing up about an experiment. If you don't have much time before the application, consider at least another shorter paper such as a part of your PI's research that you are involved in as a side project.
I am not at all familiar with agronomy, but I'd guess that the topic may be already too broad for some kind of reviews as it covers all "ornamental plants." Dissect the sample articles you got and examine how the authors specifically model their question statements.
Most common newbie mistake is writing an annotated bibliography. If the review reads like "A says a, B says b, and C et. al. says c," chance is it's not being done quite right.


Sharing referee/AE report online to point out a grievous error in refereeing I submitted a short note to a math journal providing a counterexample to a result in literature that had first appeared in that very journal.

After eight months, I heard from the journal. It was a rejection. The associate editor based his rejection on one referee who had clearly misunderstood my counterexample.

I framed a polite email to the editor-in-chief (EIC) arguing why the referee was wrong in claiming that my counter example was not valid. I don't have high hopes of hearing back from the EIC. He never responded to my emails asking for status updates in months 4, 6 and 8.

For the sake of science (the algorithm to which I propose a counterexample is used by folks in my area of applied math), I intend to upload my paper, the referee report and the covering letter of the associate editor (all of whom are anonymous) on my website and on Research Gate. Alongside this, I plan to upload an explanation explaining why the journal was mathematically wrong to reject my work. I essentially plan to simply upload the letter that I have written to the EIC where I argue why the referee/AE are wrong.

Is there any legal reason why I should not upload the referee/AE reports?

How else can I handle this messy and depressing situation?

For the sake of science [...], I intend to upload my paper, the referee report and the covering letter of the associate editor (all of whom are anonymous, BTW) on my website and on researchgate. Alongside this, I plan to upload an explanation explaining why the journal was mathematically wrong to reject my work.

Besides possibly being a copyright infringement and coming across as immature, this isn't really going to contribute anything to science.  Your paper is not going to attract a significant audience if it's only on your website and researchgate.  arXiv would be slightly better, but not much.

Your contribution to science is the paper itself, so the best way to handle this situation is to revise your paper to make it more clear, particularly to a reader who may have the same misconceptions as the reviewer did.  Then submit it to a different journal.

To be clear, I do not think it is a good idea to post an explicit rebuttal or criticism of the referee's report,  with or without the report itself, on your website or in any other public forum,.   It is unprofessional, and it will cause people to focus less on the content of your work and more on your negative reactions.  You can rebut their concerns indirectly within your paper itself ("it may appear that X, but in fact this is not true because Y"), but do not "call out" the referee or the journal.


Steady meeting room for Zoom office hours, ready at any time I would like to have my office hours via Zoom with

A link that doesn't change, so it's easy to find the meeting, and
I can join my meeting at any time, if the need shows up, not just a scheduled times.

I already know how to address the first problem, namely with repeated scheduled meetings. But I don't know how to address (2) as well. What is the best practice?

This semester, I was able to join my office hours for a scheduled meeting at any time, even outside the window of the scheduled meeting.
Zoom has a checkbox “Allow participants to join anytime” that may be selected when creating the scheduled meetings. You will get an email notification if someone joins when you are not there. This allows students to join at any time.
Because the meeting ID does not change, this satisfies your link request.
Disclaimer: I do not know if I have a special version of Zoom; whatever the university provides is what I have.


Etiquette of applying to current institution I am a postdoc and am currently applying to tenure-track faculty positions. I am unsure whether or not I should apply to my current institution.

On one hand, I would be happy to get a permanent position where I am. However, it seems like this might violate some social norm or custom. If I were to be rejected, that would feel rather personal, given that I see those who decided every day. Also, sitting through the competing job talks and meeting other candidates would be rather odd.

What is the standard etiquette for this situation? Should I ask someone before applying? If so, how should I raise the subject? I assume the answer also depends on the area and country -- this is computer science in the US.

In general, you can apply if you feel you're qualified.  If they don't want to hire you, they'll reject you, but it's not inappropriate to apply.

Tenure-track jobs get huge numbers of applicants, so statistically, it's extremely likely that you will be rejected.  If that's going to seriously disturb you and affect your ability to succeed in your current job, then you may want to think twice.

Some departments might prefer "fresh blood", which would put a strike against candidates from inside.  On the other hand, if you've been particularly successful and it's clear that you really want to stay and would take the job if offered, that can be a plus, since it reduces uncertainty for the hiring committee.

If you have a trusted contact or mentor within the department, you could talk to them about whether they think you might be a good fit for the job, or vice versa.

If you do apply, then you should make yourself scarce while other candidates are being interviewed.  (Unless of course you have already been rejected by then.)  Don't go to their talks and don't try to meet them.


Advantages and disadvantages in working after PhD while waiting for postdoc I am in the process of finishing a Chemical Engineering PhD at a british university that is solely based on numerical work and programming.

My thesis is finished and I set a date for delivery.
I have published a paper as first author, I am in the process of finishing another one (which will probably be published quite after my thesis delivery if it is accepted), co-author of a third and I have contributed to four more. However

Only the second first author paper has anything to do with my main research topic
I believe that my main research topic does not have the potential for further meaningful development
There is a period in which my productivity slumped due to mental well-being issues (I had to go to university counselling and even undergo an examination) related to my personal life

I would like to continue my career in research and academia. I enjoy the intellectual freedom, even though in these years I have also seen many downsides to research and flaws in the general. I also believe that my PhD has given me numerical knowledge that is on the more advanced scale compared to several of my colleagues in the department, but that these skills are perhaps too specific and that research positions that require them tend to prefer people that have done their PhD in a more purely numerical subject.

I have not yet secured a postdoc, although I am applying for several. One problem here is that not many groups carry out the sort of work I have studied toward, and I cannot continue working with my supervisor since he has no funding available for such a position. Among the various applications I am also trying to get into another group in my department, with my supervisor consent. This postdoc would be my favorite choice (let's call this Option 1), both for the stimulating work the group carries out and because I would prefer to continue living where I am now for personal reasons (social network, community participation and so on).
This is still not limiting my search for a postdoc, and I am applying for positions in the rest of the country and abroad.

The head in this other group seems to have a positive response to the possibility of joining him, however he told me that funding will only be available from the start of next year, if he manages to get it, and that it will have to be an open call, although I will be informed personally as soon as it is secured. I will be able to know this around December. Another identical call will be made 6 to 12 months after that.

So, at the same time I am applying for several jobs in quantitative finance, for which, by the recruiters responses, I seem to be at least minimally qualified since they are so strongly numerical. They also seem to be the highest quality job I can apply to and, having attended some recruiting events from Quanta companies, I think I would enjoy working in the sector.

I have read a few answers on this site reading gaps after your PhD, and understood that in most cases this is bad, so I don't want to sit on my butt and I would continue job-hunting and finishing up some secondary research.

What I am asking is

Would working for an year or more in a highly numerical environment hurt my chances to return to academia? Or would this be looked at positively?
If I received a postdoc offer that is less interesting to me than Option 1, would it be better to take it or would it be better to take up a job and wait for the second call of Option 1?

Work in a research position rarely starts or stops cleanly at a particular time: in addition to the work one is doing right now, there are proposals to develop for the future and the ghosts of projects past to write up and work their way through the publications pipeline.

When you move around between research-linked positions, whether in academia or industry, this is generally understood, and there is at least some space to keep these subsidiary aspects of a research career in motion.

If you step out into the "normal" working world, however, this is likely to not be the case.  This is doubly so in a high-intensity job, like being a quant, where you are likely to be asked to work quite a bit of overtime.  Thus, the impact of taking a non-academic job is likely to extend well beyond the apparent time that you work it, as you find yourself forced to abandon opportunities that you might have been able to pursue in a job more closely connected to the research world, putting a "bubble" into your career that will take time to work out even after you rejoin the research world.

That's not to say it's the wrong choice---your preferences and circumstances may well make it a better choice---but it's important to understand this is an important reason why what are intended to be temporary periods outside of the academic/research world have a tendency to become permanent.


What is considered a good GPA for studies in Germany Coming from a different schooling/grading system, I have very little feeling about what actually is considered a good grade for studies in Germany.

Here the passing grades are given in the range of 1.0 to 4.0 and there are non-passing (failing) grades, which basically tell how hard you failed.
Needless to say, 1.0 is the best possible and tells that the student performed perfectly, but what about the other grades. What does 2.0 mean? It is translated as "good" but is that average actually. How does the teacher/professor "see" that grade.

Moreover, what is the typical GPA average which gives a student a chance to be considered for a Phd position? Of course, the higher the better, but what gpa (in the german grading system) would be considered OK-ish for a phd application?

Given that "grade inflation" is often much less rampant in Germany than in other nations (it is not unusual, for instance, for the majority of students to fail an exam in a core subject), the standards inside of Germany tend not to be as stringent as in other places I've seen. For instance, anything better than 2.0 (on a 5.0 scale, not a 4.0 scale!) would generally be considered "competitive."

Obviously, there are limitations—if you get a 2.0 because you've gotten 1.0's in the general courses and 3.0 in the courses in your subdiscipline, you're not likely going to be an attractive candidate to an outside group.

However, I think much more important than the exact GPA is the quality of the master's thesis. If you have a very strong master's thesis, you will likely get some interest from the group in which you did the thesis work to continue on for a PhD, if there is an open position available. A weak grade on the thesis (anything below a 1.3) usually is a sign of substandard performance, which is likely to result in not being considered for a position, even if your GPA is a 1.1 or 1.2 (it's unlikely to be a 1.0 under such circumstances).


Should I give an overview of my research program at the beginning or at the end of my job talk? I am preparing to give a job talk for an on-campus interview
for a tenure-track assistant professor position.
In many of the job talks I have attended,
candidates will spend 40 minutes talking in depth about a particular project,
as well as spending 5-10 minutes on their research program,
i.e. summarizing other projects they have completed
and briefly describing questions they are interested in exploring
in their future research.

Question: Is it better to give the the "research program" part of the talk before the in-depth project,
or vice versa?

My personal inclination
If I recall correctly,
I have seen candidates do either of the two approaches.
I am inclined towards talking about the "research program" first,
then the in-depth project second.
This is because there has been research showing that
after 10 minutes, the people attending a lecture lose attention.
(See John Medina's book Brain Rules)
If I leave the "research program" to the end,
I am afraid many people may have "fallen asleep" by then,
but if I put it in the beginning,
hopefully it is more likely to be remembered.

I agree with your inclination: explaining your research programme, arguably the most important part of a tenure-track job talk, at the end seems counter-productive, to say the least. Moreover, I would definitely not spend only 5 minutes of your talk on your programme. 10 minutes seems like the absolute minimum in a one-hour job talk.

More generally, job talks tend to consist of five parts:

The "About Me" part that usually kicks off the talk. Keep this short, as it is essentially pretty boring for the audience.
The "Intro" of the research field. Explain your audience what you are actually doing. Here, the point is not so much to sell your own work within the field, but to sell the field itself to the faculty.
Your "Research Agenda" within the field. As I mentioned above, arguably the most important part of the talk. The biggest mistake here is to step into what I call the "parameter optimization" trap - making it seem like your research agenda consists primarily of small incremental improvements of your PhD thesis.
The "Zoom In". Take out one part of your work, and explain in detail what you have been doing.
The "Outlook". Wrap the talk up with an outlook. Where is your field going, where are you going, how would your joining change the research of the faculty?

One problem is knowing how far in-depth each of these segments should be. My PhD advisor used to say that bullets (2) and (3) need to be easy enough to understand that every CS faculty can follow, but deep enough that it still perceived as important and valuable research. For bullet (4), it is ok (maybe expected) that the details are not all that accessible anymore for faculty working in very different fields. However, at Bullet (5), you need to pick up your entire audience again.


Reviewer recommending citation of certain papers of specific group of authors may be himself Recently I had a challenge in responding to a reviewer (#2) for revising our work. The reviewer asked us to refer 16 papers in multiple parts of the paper. I decided to refer some of these references about 8 papers due to the not relevancy of the mentioned references from the reviewer to the question raised by the reviewer #2.

Now the reviewers commented on the revised version and three of them are accepted without any further comments and modification. But the reviewer #2 rejected the paper and said that the authors didn't consider my concerns and comments thoroughly and only partially answered to them.

I think that this reviewer objects to our work because of we didn't refer to all of 16 mentioned paper in his comments.

The editor asked from us to answer why we didn't answer the reviewer #2 comments and revise our work to answer them.

I have two scenarios in my mind:

State clearly the unprofessional work of the reviewer #2 to forcing us to mention many papers from a group of specific people with a similar author in all of them and weak relevance of the mentioned works to that comment.
Reanswer the comments of reviewer #2 and mention some of the wanted references

what should I do now?

Neither, you should just write an answer (not change the article) in which you mention for each paper why you did not cite it. Keep it objective, calm, and short. If the reviewer is unprofessional then that will become clear enough, and your professionalism will be all the more obvious.


Repositories of funded research projects in different countries? I am looking for different national repositories (US, Canada, Australia, UK, etc.) of funded research projects, similar to what Cordis does in EU. Any suggestions?

I am after any repository that list funded research and some of the projects details, whether it is public, private or partnership...

In the US, the government funded agencies usually publish lists of funded projects. For example, you can search the National Science Foundation database for all of the funded projects relating to "beer". Each of these entries lists the name of the project, the NSF program that funded it, the PI's names and contact information, the amount awarded, the date awarded, and an abstract, among other information.

Here are the databases from other US government funding agencies:

National Endowment for the Arts
National Endowment for the Humanities
Environmental Protection Agency
Department of Energy
National Institutes of Health

There are other agencies probably, but all you need to do is go to their main site and search for "funded projects" or "Search awards" or "recent awards" or something like that.

One agency that may be hard to search would be DARPA (Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency), which is the scientific research arm of US military.


PhD defence announcement What information should contain a (A4-sized, landscape-oriented) poster announcing a PhD defence? What idioms, jargon or style is usually used? Could you provide some models or examples?

This example, from my PhD institution, seems to be pretty typical.  As you can see it's quite basic.  I don't think there's really a need to include much more information than this.  The only thing I might add is a short abstract.


What happens if my GRE scores arrive after the deadline? There is a possibility that my GRE scores will reach the admission office 2 or 3 days after the specified deadline- Although the university will only start taking decision in April- Will my application be set as incomplete?

Ask the university. If they know your situation in advance, they will probably be able to accommodate you. Ask if you can either submit the whole application late, or if you should submit the rest of your application on time and send just the GRE score through when it arrives.


Refusing the postdoc offer (email acceptance of the offer only) I have a classical situation, but as it is the first in my live, I would like to know: if it is acceptable to refuse a postdoctoral offer. The contract is not signed, the paperwork are going to start, my official commitment was 'Yes, I am taking your offer' by email).
The reason is having an up-to-the-minute offer from the other University, which I like more. That offer however is agreed only by email, no papers are prepared.
Thank you for any tips.

Officially, you're always allowed to walk out. Particularly before signing any papers. Just make sure you let everyone know as soon as possible to avoid creating expectations and preparations.

Now, you're probably asking whether your peers will be happy if you walk out. Usually they will not appreciate anyone dropping a postdoctoral offer. If you understand exactly why they're pushy about you taking the offer, you will be in a better position to take this decision.

Don't worry about making others happy. Do what you must.

Good luck!


Are there systems to automatically blind a paper? I am looking for systems to make a research paper blind (i.e., remove all information about authors, affiliations, maybe even anonymize self-references to previous work) and do this automatically, i.e., without human intervention. Do such systems exist?
I have four main use cases in mind for this:

As a reviewer in non-double-blind venues, you may nevertheless prefer to review the papers of your batch by hiding information about the identity, affiliations, etc., of authors, to avoid biasing yourself. This probably wouldn't be easy in practice (as you often get emails about the papers, or see info about the papers on an editorial platform such as Easychair, which prominently feature the author information) but could be doable nevertheless (e.g., with the help of someone else to retrieve the papers for you). In this use case, the blinding system would take as input a PDF file of the article and hide author information, etc., probably using some PDF extraction tool such as Grobid.
As an editor of an overlay journal (where articles and submissions are hosted on a public repository), if you want your overlay journal to be double-blind, you will need to give reviewers a blinded version of the articles, but of course the original articles hosted on arXiv will have to feature the author information prominently, so you'll need to remove it. In this use case, for papers typeset in LaTeX, the blinding system could work from the LaTeX sources of the paper (distributed by arXiv), which is probably easier (but still tricky for non-anonymous self-references).
As an author, when (re)submitting your work to a double-blind conference, it would be helpful to automatically make the paper blind or at least have a way to flag potential violations of blindness (the most interesting ones being non-anonymous self-citations). Again this could work from the LaTeX sources.
Finally, when operating a double-blind conference, when authors submit their manuscript (as LaTeX sources or as PDF), it could be useful to automatically make it double-blind, or at least highlight possible double-blindness violations. (This is the previous point but on the conference side.)

[I am not sure whether this question is in scope here -- I hesitated with Software Recommendations but this is rather specific to academia so posting it here.]

No.
AI is getting smarter every day, but they're still not smart enough to realize that "In [paper] we showed [result]" is a self-reference that breaks anonymity. You will unfortunately have to anonymize papers yourself.
It's not a proof of course, but if such software existed, Elsevier would know about it. Since they didn't mention it in their "prepare for double-blind peer review" page, it doesn't exist.


Asking for a letter of recommendation from someone on a hiring committee that is also reviewing your application I applied to a job at university A.  It happens that a life-long friend (and, much later, professional colleague) is on the hiring committee for that job.  Yay for that job.  It's for my secondary field though, so while I can see myself getting an interview, I don't realistically see myself getting the position unless everyone else screws up horribly along the interview process which is of course possible as I've seen it happen.
There is also a job at university B that I'm going to apply to.  My friend/colleague at A is one of the people whose letters would be optimal given college type, subfields, etc.  Except that I also applied to the job at A, and it now feels awkward to ask them for a letter for B.
Were the job market not as awful as it is in COVID times, I would just go with "get a letter from someone else", but the market crunch means I also need to be able to put my best dossier together.  So, would it be unreasonable/overly awkward/etc to ask them for a letter, or is this a normal(ish) enough situation to not be concerned about its potential impact on getting a job at A?

In many, and I hope most, places your friend will need to recuse from the decision to hire you even if they don't write a letter. Given that, assuming it is true, getting a letter from them isn't an issue.
But you can ask, first, for their advice on whether a letter from them would be helpful or not. It is even possible, I suppose, that rules would make such a letter off limits for consideration, though I think that would be rare.
It might be that an informal verbal recommendation from them to the hiring committee would carry weight (if not seen as improper), in which case a letter from someone else would be valuable.
But either avoid the issue completely by asking someone else for a letter or explore it with your friend first.


Doing a PhD in data science / machine learning after a PhD in civil engineering I am about to finish my Ph.D. in civil engineering, I would finish it by the age of 28.
I don't like my field that much and was pushed to pursue it from the beginning (at that time, was very confused and did not know what I want / I need and that is a huge problem in my personality, so my father pushed me to pursue it even though I did not like it at all !).
(one could ask why did you pursue a PhD in a field you don't like; the answer is pretty simple; it was the only way to get out of a third-world country :D)
seeing the big-fat salaries of data scientists/machine learning engineers around the world makes me jealous sometimes and makes me super unsatisfied with the work/research and the field I am pursuing.
I am really considering getting some undergraduate courses once I finish my current Ph.D. and start applying for CS masters. I will try to apply for double grants also, don't know if my current Ph.D. could help get those grants which will make me financially comfortable pursuing research in other fields again.
Also, I want to pursue a Ph.D. in machine learning cause I see the salaries are fatter for those dudes; I don't like academia and I don't like research and I really do hate teaching but I am used to doing a lot of things I don't like.
What are your perspectives?

I will agree with the commentators who say that one PhD is enough. I am sure you can start applying ideas from machine learning in your field (civil engineering) and perhaps after a while even move to a completely different field. PhD is essentially a qualification that demonstrates your ability to engage in abstract learning and research. You don't need two of these degrees to doubly-certify yourself. If you feel that you are lacking in certain aspects of knowledge related to machine learning or data science, find collaborators in these fields -- that's way more efficient than taking classes (and more productive in terms of research output).


Already have a DOI number but can't find it My paper was accepted and it was given a DOI, but I can't find yet.
It seems the conference didn't upload the papers for the ACM digital library yet.

Is it normal?
How long does it take to upload a conference paper to the ACM DL?

ACM normally publishes its conference proceedings just before the conference begins.  The default used to be immediately before the conference begins, but at least some ACM conferences have proceedings available a week in advance.

If you want to double-check (especially if the conference has already happened), you should ask the program committee chair.


What are the advantages and disadvantages of an "open gradebook" policy? At the end of the semester,
after the grades have been determined and released to the students,
I will receive emails from multiple students appealing for higher grades.

A few years ago, my colleagues developed a large course (> 600 students)
which is offered across multiple sections.
They chose to adopt a "semi-closed gradebook" policy
where the grades for the quizzes are released to the students,
but the grades for most of the other assignments and the project
are not released to the students.
When I asked my colleague about why she adopted such a policy,
they stated that the reason for this policy is that the class is large
and she didn't want to waste time dealing with
grade grubbers,
i.e., students who complain that they should get a higher score
for this or that assignment.

After a year, I inherited this course from her,
and as the course leader for this course,
I am able to make changes.
In the last two years,
I have maintained the "semi-closed gradebook" policy
introduced by the previous course leader.
However, I am wondering if I should adopt an "open gradebook" policy
where the marks for every assignment are released.
One benefit of such a policy is that if we make a mistake,
e.g., a student submitted an assignment,
but we gave the student a zero by mistake,
the student can notify us of our mistake and it can be corrected.
In addition, giving students some feedback
about their performance in the course
can help them to feel less worried and uncertain about how they are doing.

Question:
What are the advantages and disadvantages of an open gradebook policy?

Response to comments

Question in comment:
Do you give students other individual feedback on these assignments, and just hide the numeric grade? Or do they get no feedback on them?

In the past,
we do give the students their numeric score for some of the assignments.
I would like to give the students some written feedback on their assignments,
however, the graders are not very motivated,
and I am unsure how the logistics should work for given written feedback.
For example, should the grader send an email
to every student individually to give feedback,
which is more than 600 students?

Case study: The biggest upwards bump I ever got in student evaluations was when I started making all course and assignment grades available on the school's digital learning management system (accessible 24/7 online by student login). Previously I'd noticed that my lowest score was in the category of "Instructor keeps me informed as to how I'm doing", and using the LMS to make all grades visible immediately fixed that.

I would argue that more transparency is always better in cases like this. It serves to clarify policies to the students, allows both sides to double-check, and reduce student anxiety (all of which are good things to model). My opinion is that this is the direction that reduces student inquiries about grades.

I have had some colleagues who argued the same "Don't release grades so students can't argue about them", and I've never understood that. The whole situation feels more tense and high-stakes. The only downside I can think of is that open grading gives somewhat less flexibility to the instructor, in that it forces them to be honest and not goose scores in either direction for extraneous reasons.


Is Scientometrics a scientific discipline? This question is not about the politics of scientometrics, nor is it on the role of scientometrics in governmental research programs, nor is it about the use of scientometric indices: these questions have been already addressed and debated somewhere else on academia.SE., for instance

Which bibliometrics index to trust more?
Scientifically meaningful sources of bibliometrics
Which is the most accepted measure for an individual's academic productivity?

The following question is about scientific method(s).

After these few words to avoid any debate, I would like to naively ask about the scientific rigor of scientometrics. Is there any kind of rigor/general method/scientific concept behind this field of research? Or maybe a more aggressive question: is scientometry a science?

Scientometrics is a science to the extent that it applies the scientific method to a field of inquiry. Researchers in this area formulate questions and conceptualize existing problems (e.g., “in these times of scarcity, the public wants research to be efficient: how can we measure this?”), they make hypotheses, make predictions, gather data to test them, analyze the data and prove or disprove their hypotheses.

Regarding “what do we scientifically learn from scientometrics?”, well, there are plenty of established results (you can find some on wikipedia), but I'll use one recent paper from Scientometrics which highlights what this field can bring us:

  Negative results are disappearing from most disciplines and countries
  D. Fanelli, Scientometrics 2012, 90, 891–904

This one was really an eye-opener for me, on a phenomenon which I always supposed existed, but it was nice to see it backed by hard data. Other examples include:

  Physical and economic bias in climate change research: a scientometric study of IPCC Third Assessment Report
  A. Bjurström and M. Polk, Climatic Change 2011, 108, 1–22

  Language biases in the coverage of the Science Citation Index and its consequences for international comparisons of national research performance
  T. N. van Leeuwen, H. F. Moed, R. J. W. Tijssen, M. S. Visser, A. F. J. van Raan, Scientometrics 2001, 51, 335–346

I'll finish with a personal opinion: while I am annoyed, as most people, with the emphasis currently given on bibliometrics in the evaluation of research and research projects, I think scientometrics in general has an important role to play, just like related fields such as studies on ethics of research: better understanding the positive and negative implications of the way we currently do science is healthy (the meta-level of research).


Why do even prominent institutions hire publishing houses (Springer / Elsevier etc.) for their journals? The Institution of Engineers (India) is a prestigious organisation with more than one million members in 15 engineering disciplines in 114 centers or chapters in India and overseas.

Yet, it doesn't prefer to publish its journals itself. All of its journals are published by Springer. This concerns me slightly because it helps in maintaining the monopoly that publishing houses have on research publications.

Why do even such large and reputed institutions not choose to publish on their own?

It's not trivial to run a journal. You need so many things:

A journal management system
A desk editor to constantly keep in contact with the editorial board, answer author queries, etc
A content editor familiar with the subject matter to identify topics for invited reviews, perform editorial screening, etc
A typesetter who can set every manuscript, no matter what format it's written in (Word, LaTeX, etc) into the journal's style
A copyeditor and proofreader to check the paper's English
A marketing executive to promote the journal, e.g. by finding related conferences and getting insertions
An epub executive to handle the journal's website, epub files and distribution, deal with copyright infringement, and so on
A sales executive to handle subscriptions, payments, and customer service
An artist to design the journal cover, its promotional materials, and so on
Someone to liaise with printers to print hardcopies of the journal, and then get them delivered to conferences / subscribers

Note this list covers a wide range of skills. It's unlikely a single person can do all of them without extensive training. But publishers already have people who specialize in all of these. By engaging Springer / Elsevier etc to handle their journal, the Institution of Engineers saves themselves the trouble of having to learn how to publish a journal. In this, it's not that different from trusting one's university's IT technicians to keep the IT network up and running. One could learn how to maintain a network and do-it-yourself, but why not just leave it to the professionals.


How can I tell if I'm being too picky as a referee? I am a mathematician, frequently asked to referee papers. (As my career progresses, I now find myself frequently asked to referee good papers.)

I have found that I've gotten pickier and pickier as a referee. I just now finished a referee report (for an excellent paper, submitted to an excellent journal) with 53 bullet points on it: mistakes I found, requests for clarification, other suggestions.

On another occasion I believe I submitted six "revise and resubmit" reports for the same paper, before finally recommending acceptance.

In all these cases I am spending a lot of time reading the papers (which is worthwhile; they're interesting papers!), and I'm almost as meticulous as if it were my name on the paper.

How can I tell if I am going overboard with this? I have never heard any negative comments by anyone – including by journal editors, whom I asked for feedback on this matter after sending my reports. Indeed, editors have acted extremely happy that I've read these papers in such close detail. Nevertheless, I wonder if I am investing too much time in this, and/or annoying the authors.

In my humble opinion, it looks like you are the ideal reviewer actually! You give a lot of advice to improve the paper, and this directly benefits the authors and the journal. And apparently you give very precise advice, which is much more useful and actionable than general or vague remarks.

My main concern as a reviewer is to be fair in my final recommendation. As long as your meticulousness doesn't lead you to reject potentially good papers, you are doing a good job as a reviewer. However the question of whether you are spending too much time on it depends on your priorities, it's important to weigh the benefits and costs for yourself before you accept. It's perfectly acceptable to refuse a review from time to time in order to maintain the level of quality for the ones you accept.


Group/lab guide for new students and post-docs: what should it contain? Large research groups have guides for newcomers, which contain both important information, both high-level and practical, on their new position and the group. I don't have such a large group, but I can see the value in keeping all important information in one central place.

So, if I get to writing such a document, what information should one put in a group guide for new group members?

You can find a lot of good examples on the web, written by professors with a lot more experience, but here is mine.  It includes guidelines and advice on:

How to approach group meetings and individual meetings with advisor (me)
Finding a thesis topic
Planning and recording research
Reading the literature
Writing papers
Publishing papers
Giving talks
Programming
Recommended software tools
General conduct


Should I stop worrying and work on my current postdoc till I get something else? Last 11 months have been a roller coaster. Towards the end of my PhD last year, I applied to few places, did not get any offers. My PhD advisor offered me a interim postdoc to support myself while I searched for other positions.
To begin my postdoc, I had to get my work permit. So, I decided not to go to my home country and stay 2 months till I get my work permit and then take a month break before joining my PhD supervisor as a postdoc.
Then covid happened. My work permit processing got delayed. My source of income got indefinitely postponed. I lost all motivation to work and search for jobs.
Finally, I got my permit in June. And since June I am working on the postdoc position diligently. Since January,I had wasted 5 months doing nothing. But since June, I have worked on different projects. Submitted two papers. Have plans for more.
Now, I won't be able to move out of my current country of residence due to covid restrictions. And my PhD advisor offered me an extension on the initial contract till the end of next year.
I am worrying about how it would look to future employers. I already have a 10 months gap between my master's and starting my PhD.
I am very worried. Though I know I can publish 6-7 journal papers till the mid of next year, I am worried about my CV.
My mind says to concentrate on the current job. Keep applying but to accept the possibility that I won't get anything. One year is enough to make a huge change in CV. I should work hard on this postdoc position and consider myself lucky to have this job in the current situation.
What do you think? Thank you for reading the entire thing.

Don't worry about gaps that are easy to explain, especially by something that will have affected everyone to some extend, such as Covid in 2020/2021 (and hopefully not any longer...).
Keep working on your postdoc, and keep applying to positions that are in your interest.
Besides that, it is totally normal to have a few months between two positions every now and then. I'd love to have such a gap by the way, to take a long holiday without having to explain anything.


Created a figure for a colleague's thesis, want to use that myself as well A colleague of mine who also writes a master thesis in lattice QCD (theoretical/computational physics) asked me to make him a few simple figures with TikZ. They show a fundamental concept and are not particularly hard. The plaquette (see page 3) is just a square with arrows on the lines and then some labels on the edges. The clover term (see page 4) is just four plaquettes. The concepts are fundamental, I could create a plaquette drawing in my sleep, for the clover I need a quick glance at a sketch to get everything right.

It took me like 20 minutes to make the sketches. He has send me images taken from other papers and books to give me the idea. Those figures are used everywhere in books and introductory papers. There they do not seem to refer to anything else but just give the figures. He will submit his thesis with the images next week.

My own master thesis will be due next fall, and I can certainly also use those figures in my thesis. I doubt that somebody will pull up his thesis and my thesis, find the exact same looking images (except the font of the text), look at the dates of publication, and call me out for plagiarizing. However, I'd to handle this situation properly because this situation might arise again with a less trivial figure.

What would I into the caption in my thesis?

“insprired by Author [1]”
“taken from Author [1], typeset in TikZ”
Nothing at all, the other authors did not do that and the figure is not that hard to do anyway

Should I somehow refer to the colleague's thesis although it only has prompted me to create those figures now instead of in six months? I am not sure whether he will say anything about me making those figures, should I ask him to do that such that I can safely use those figures myself?

With all due respect to your TikZ prowess (which indeed is more impressive than my own non-existent TikZ skills), these figures are... not exactly the Mona Lisa. Anyway, they are your work and you should feel free to use them and not say anything at all about the circumstances of their creation. If we had to give credit for every microscopic idea that inspired a turn of phrase or visual idea in the papers we write, they would all be three times as long and virtually unreadable. The situation you are describing is simply too trivial and unimportant to warrant mentioning in my opinion.

As for the future, if in the future you contribute a more substantial intellectual product to a project that then publishes it without an acknowledgement to you, then later want to use the same product in your own publication, then because of the concerns you mention here it may be sensible to accompany the figure or whatever it is with a footnote along the lines of "This figure is the author's original work, and was used with permission in [insert reference to earlier work that used your figure]."


How much feedback should you get from a Supervisor? My dissertation is due next month and I’m extremely stressed about it.
I meet with my supervisor nearly every week but apart from being given papers to read I don’t feel like I’ve been supported enough regarding feedback.
Whenever I sent drafts of my work they never gave any written feedback and just told me at the next meeting “I didn’t read it in detail but I thought it was good” - this has happened two or three times already.
I submitted my most recent draft and after cancelling our meeting they said they would give me an email of written feedback and it never arrived.
When I gave a draft of my work to another lecturer earlier in the year they gave a large and precise list of things that could be improved. Their level of feedback made me think if that’s what I should be receiving more often.
I don’t know if I’m expecting too much from a supervisor or if this one is the norm.

I meet with my supervisor nearly every week

This sounds like a good level of engagement. Some people may prefer more frequent contact, some may prefer less (and it may vary by stage of a project), but I'd say "nearly every week" is a pretty solid middle ground.

Whenever I ask the supervisor on things I don’t understand they never have an answer and say they don’t know

It's reasonable to expect students to do their own work towards finding answers, and when you get into "research-level" investigation rather than "coursework-level", experts in the field do not have full knowledge of everything. There's too much "stuff" out there, it's not possible for even experts to be on top of everything except their very narrow world. Even most things they may have read may not come to memory on cue. This can even include details of ones own past work! Knowledge at the research level mostly involves being able to find the information you want efficiently and to understand it - sometimes this involves just knowing the general area enough to know search terms to use, sometimes it involves knowing particular individuals who may have written on the topic, sometimes it involves realizing you've read something similar before and finding the paper in some way you've organized papers (perhaps in a literal file cabinet, or in these digital days perhaps a PDF on your file system).
It's also quite common that there is no answer, or the answer depends on so many different factors that the answer is ultimately up to informed opinion, and different people will come to different conclusions.
Without knowing what sorts of things you are asking about, it's hard to know if your supervisor is just nudging you to do more background work on your own, or if they're pushing you off to save their own time investment, or if they're entirely clueless.

“I didn’t read it in detail but I thought it was good”

This response would be frustrating to me, too, but without knowing your advisor it's tough to judge. Perhaps they really do think your work is just fine. That's great, and nothing you need to do about it! Perhaps they think your work is good enough for a masters thesis. That's great, though unfortunate if you're trying to polish some skills, but should get you through the proximate goal of graduation.

Also I asked them about a key idea in the project that was central to one of the papers and they just said “I don’t understand it either”.

It's not entirely clear but I assume you mean this is a paper that is part of a project you're working on, with your advisor as one of the authors? It's unfortunate, then, if they are an author on a paper they don't entirely understand, but sometimes that's what happens when you collaborate. Hopefully they at least understood at the time of publication, but in this situation I might ask that they direct you to someone who does understand better. Sometimes experts rely on other experts with differing expertise: this is a much more efficient way to work in interdisciplinary areas than attempting to become an expert in everything (which is futile).

I submitted my most recent draft and after cancelling our meeting they said they would give me an email of written feedback and it never arrived.

This is rude, though it's reasonable for you to give them another nudge and ask when you can expert feedback. Hopefully they respond productively.

I don’t know if I’m expecting too much from a supervisor or if this one is the norm. I thought they were meant to be experts in the field.

Nothing in the story you tell sounds to me like it conflicts with your supervisor being an expert in the field. It sounds like there are some orthogonal issues: maybe they're too busy (which is a bad excuse, but not particularly uncommon), maybe they see your project as not particularly important, maybe they have more expectations of independence from the students they advise. What you describe sounds "normal" to me, but "normal" doesn't mean "acceptable". My own research advisors were always more helpful than what you describe. From the selection of questions we get on this site, others are much worse.

If you were earlier in the process, I'd suggest finding a different supervisor that aligns better with the guidance you're looking for. Being just a month from your due date, though, I'd keep a shorter view and look to just your immediate next goals. Ask very specific questions of your advisor about your next goals, not vague requests for feedback. Questions like: "is this work sufficient for a masters thesis so that I can graduate/get good marks/publish in a peer reviewed journal?" And, if not, what specifically do you need to do to fix that.


Is it advisable to upload your PhD thesis on Biorxiv? The university theses repository is not indexed in the main scientific literature search engines. This issue makes finding a thesis difficult, and it's a problem especially because after PhD many are looking for a postdoc position.

Is it a good idea to upload a biology related PhD thesis on Biorxiv.org?

Does Biorxiv.org allow it?
Is is legal on the copyright side?
Are there any drawbacks?

This is not allowed on bioArxiv, consider using Arxiv instead:

https://www.biorxiv.org/about/FAQ

  bioRxiv does not permit the posting of news, product advertisements,
  teaching materials, policy statements, theses, dissertations, student
  projects, recipes and simple protocols.


How Important is the GRE General / Subject compared to ACT / SAT? I am about to graduate with a B.A. in Math and want to pursue a Ph.D. in the subject. I understand that most graduate schools require both the general GRE as well as the subject math test.

I am wondering exactly how important these exams are for admissions. Obviously it varies by school, so I was hoping people could compare them to undergraduate admissions with the ACT or SAT.

For example, as a high school student we were told that SAT / ACT scores were an important but not determining factor in admissions. Accordingly, I stressed quite a bit about my scores and even retook the ACT.

For a graduate program, especially in mathematics, is the general GRE really that important? Or is it more of a check mark — that is, to make sure candidates are able to read and write, but not necessarily to pick those with the highest scores.

Similarly, are the subject tests decisive at all? Or are they used to just make sure that you know the "basics," while the course load and letters of recommendation are far more important.

Certain programs in Mathematics will heavily weight the GRE Subject test for mathematics programs. Many top programs will have a threshold that they expect students to pass for them to actually read the application. Usually, one should view the subject test more as something that can help you be considered, not something that can get you accepted to a program.

This being said, it is definitely something that should not be considered just as a formality when applying to top 25 universities.


Physics Talk by an Undergraduate Student -- Preparation I have been asked to give a talk by one of my undergraduate professors. The talk shall be based on the research work I did over the summer. Since this'll be my first shot at giving a talk (as an undergraduate), I'm a bit nervous. Suggestions on how to generally go about talks?

Also, I have to make a presentation for the talk. Most of the work I did is in the form of Mathematica notebooks/LaTex drafts. Is there an efficient way to incorporate them into slides?

Also, I'm wondering how to get my hands on the slides of design as shown in: http://www4.stat.ncsu.edu/~reich/st810A/oral.pdf. I have seen professors present there lectures on such slides. How can I access this template?

The slides you linked to are using the Beamer LaTeX class, specifically that looks like the Copenhagen theme without a table of contents.  Beamer makes beautiful slide shows that will take you at least three times longer to make than Power Point, more if you're including images or other formatting beyond bullet points and text, or have never used it.

Personally I tend to use it for everything and then complain about how much less time I could have spent on it if I had used PowerPoint.  Pick what works for you.

My general advice when it comes to mathematical formulas in slide presentations is to exclude everything possible.  I find even when I am familiar with the research, it's very hard to parse a formula on the fly, while it's up on a projector for 60 seconds.  Obviously if it's crucial then your audience will just have to cope, but always try to use narrative or images or other easy-to-consume-on-the-fly formats to make your point where possible.  If the audience is interested then they'll get your paper and study it to understand all the equations.

The other important universal rule to presenting like this is that you will take up way more time than you expected.  Practice is good, but regardless, lean toward less material and slower, more detailed discussion of it than trying to cram in tons.  Remember that you don't have to make every point of your research in one presentation.  Present enough to convey the broad idea to everyone, and convince those so inclined to read your paper where they'll learn the rest.


Do extracurricular activities matter for a person in academia? The only thing I can think of is scholarship application. But how much do scholarship committees look at extracurricular activities? Do they look for the positions that you held?

Frankly I'm very weak at extracurricular activities and don't know what to do.

I think this would depend on your meaning of "extracurricular".  In terms of having photography as a hobby, I am not sure how that would help.  However, for faculty, extracurricular activities that benefit the university have been well discussed on academia SE, for example, serving as a reviewer on a journal.  Other activities that could be seen as beneficial is volunteering for a first robotics at the local school (if the university if public, that may be more important for secondary education), or organizing a TEDx event.

In general, I would view the reason anyone would care about extracurricular activities is for students; how does it make the student more diverse, more capable, more knowledgable, easier to work with, etc.  And for faculty; how does it make the faculty represent the university better, improve student or research connections, make their own research more interesting, etc.


How to present a paper via skype? I'm doing a skype presentation of a paper that would be published soon. The presentation is for an improvement of a procedure that was not so accurate before (Computer Science related). Should I only keep the cam towards me or should I share the screen as well with the ppts? I've got 7 minutes for the presentation and 3 minutes for Q & A. It's my first skype presentation and I have no idea on how this would be done.

I have presented powerpoint slides by:

voice call while screen sharing the window with the presentation (works quite well)
video call with slides behind me, having emailed the slides to the audience beforehand (works well for smaller audiences as long as you remember to say "next slide" or similar when you change. Sounds like it would be annoying but everyone gets used to it very quickly).

I have also seen

record the presentation offline, replay as a video and have a skype q&a afterwards (this was odd, I wouldn't recommend it).

Final tips:

Do a practice run with your supervisor/colleague over Skype
Make sure you have reliable, fast internet (at my University that still means a wire) and a quiet room


What is the difference between a journal whose name ends with "Letters" versus "Reviews"? What is the difference between a journal named "Letters" & "Reviews" in the end?
e.g. journal named - "Neural Processing Letters", "Machine Learning Reviews".
What is the core difference between these two types of journal?
Thanks.

Letters and reviews are two different types of articles. Notably, letters are expected to be short, and reviews do not usually include new results.
Letter:

These papers communicate brief reports of data from original research that editors believe will be interesting to many researchers, and that will likely stimulate further research in the field. As they are relatively short the format is useful for scientists with results that are time sensitive (for example, those in highly competitive or quickly-changing disciplines). This format often has strict length limits, so some experimental details may not be published until the authors write a full Original Research manuscript. These papers are also sometimes called Brief communications.

Review:

Review Articles provide a comprehensive summary of research on a certain topic, and a perspective on the state of the field and where it is heading. They are often written by leaders in a particular discipline after invitation from the editors of a journal. Reviews are often widely read (for example, by researchers looking for a full introduction to a field) and highly cited. Reviews commonly cite approximately 100 primary research articles.

A journal titled "Machine Learning Reviews" is probably not going to consider letters, and vice versa - so do not submit there.


When is the official date a degree is obtained? I've read that there is a difference between the date that a higher degree committee approves a student for graduation and the actual date of graduation. The first being the date that a student becomes a graduand and the second being the date that a student becomes a graduate. These two dates could be far apart. My question is which of these two dates should be shown next to a degree on a CV or resume? Obviously I would like it to be the first, but that would lead to a discrepancy between the date on the resume and the date on the certificate. Someone suggested I could show both the completion and graduation date on my CV.

Usually the graduation date is the date on which the last accomplishment needed for graduation was completed.

This could be a thesis defense but could also be something else. For example in some Master and Bachelor programs I know one may have a "final" presentation prior to handing in the thesis. So the graduation date is the date at which the thesis is handed in. Note that even though a thesis defense may not count towards your grade, it is usually still a required accomplishment and consequently it date counts.


May copying a particular statement be considered as a plagiarism? "A definition is a statement of the meaning of a term... In mathematics, a definition is used to give a precise meaning to a new term, instead of describing a pre-existing term." - Wikipedia.

Suppose, I have mentioned a standard definition of a mathmatical term, exactly copied from a textbook, in my research article. May it be considered as a plagarism?

Similarly, I use an earlier proved theorem in my article. I mentioned its statement exactly as it is stated  in the original artile along with its proper reference. May it be considered as a plagarism?

Is there any standard rule regarding plagarism?

Suppose, I have mentioned a standard definition of a mathematical term, exactly copied from a textbook, in my research article. May it be considered as a plagarism?

If the term is really standard, no plagiarism has been committed. But cite the source you got the definition from. Even such a standard term as the set of natural numbers can be introduced differently: either including zero or not. There are also notational reasons: as an extreme example, there are researchers in the wild who don't associate ℕ₀ with the former and ℕ₊ with the latter (or at least, they say they cannot parse these symbols and reject your paper on these grounds).

  Similarly, I use an earlier proved theorem in my article. I mentioned its statement exactly as it is stated in the original article along with its proper reference. May it be considered as a plagarism?

The same applies here. If the theorem is really standard, no plagiarism has been committed. Again, cite the source. Some theorems have subtleties (the zero, the empty set, up to isomorphism, etc.) which you understand only when you dig deep into the cited paper.


What is proper author order when you write paper based on colleague's work? My colleague has developed a software framework. I have not contributed towards software development but I have been asked by my advisor to write a paper describing the software since my colleague is not experienced in writing.

In this situation, what is the proper order of authors ?

In this particular case

Author of the framework
you
your advisor

but that is strongly dependent on your local and institutions' customs and practices. Ask your advisor informally. When still in doubt, always add yourself second to the first draft. If appropriate, your advisor will suggest moving you to first position, which is a lot less embarrasing than the other way around (your advisor suggesting you should take your name down a notch)


For Master's admissions, are recommendations from academics preferred? In making an application to a Master's program, would I be wise to seek recommendations from academics, practitioners, or both in balance? Or would any credible letter meet the required threshold? Or does this not matter?

I can easily imagine that for PhD programs the balance would be tipped towards letters from academics.

Normally, you should prefer academics, but you want the people who can most honestly attest to your accomplishments and the likelihood of your future success.

However, if the MS is focused on things outside the normal academic tracks, on, say, industrial practice, then a letter from a practitioner who also has the ability to fairly evaluate you would be fine. But for academic subjects or in a field that can lead to a doctorate now or later, academics would probably be better.

But also note that you are appealing to an admissions committee that has a certain background and certain views. You want that appeal to be successful. Thus, if you expect that they all have an industrial focus, then someone (again, who knows your abilities) from that industry would be good.

For doctoral level admissions, you are right. The balance tips more firmly toward academics, but exceptions occur even there.


Can I affiliate with a university and use its IRB to do self-funded research part-time? I am a social scientist about to finish my PhD program, and I'm hoping that I will get an academic job that will enable me to PI my own studies.  However, I think there is a chance that this will not happen. I love doing research, so I'm wondering - is there a way I can affiliate with a university so that I can use its IRB and do (self-funded) research part-time?

I was thinking I might try to find a job that pays well and then do it just 4 days per week so that I can have the 5th day to myself to do research. I am in the U.S.

Please also feel free to suggest tags in the comments so that I can get this post seen by the right people.

Thank you!

I will guess that this will be difficult to do in your early career. Universities have a lot of rules and a lot of lawyers worried about liability and such. If you teach part time, perhaps in the evening, then it would be a different situation. The pay is terrible, but it does establish the relationship you need.

But note that the IRB process isn't limited to universities. There are companies who are qualified to do it for a fee.

Anyone can do research and anyone can submit to conferences and journals. It is a way to build up your credentials. You don't need academic affiliation to do, or publish, research. Finding collaborators is a bit harder, but you can manage that as well, perhaps just by visiting a local institution and opening a dialog. Perhaps you would be permitted to join a research seminar or such. And joint publication with someone affiliated avoids some of the complications.

But, as you know, the best path is to get an academic job if it otherwise appeals to you.


Best way to respond to a request for CV after graduation I did a summer internship in an industry for 9 week. It was a great experience and my supervisor was a very formal and professional lady. She rarely smiled but appreciated my work every now and then. On my last day, she asked about my graduation date and I told her it’s just 6 months away as it was my last semester.
She responded: "Send me your CV when you graduate.”

Now I want to write to her. How do I begin with that? It’s been 6 months and there’s no particular opening in that department. Should I send my CV in the first mail itself? If so should I also include a cover letter? What's the best way to introduce myself?

Just send a note with 1 to 3 short paragraphs.

Remind her of the work you did together (you are colleagues, brothers in arms).
Give her an update on what you have done during the last 6 months (e.g. papers you published, your thesis, courses you took).
Let her know what job options you are looking at (even prospects). Ask her for any advice on your prospects and whether she knows of any opportunity at her place or elsewhere.
Thank her for the time together and how it benefited you.

And yes, include the CV.


Is organizing a thesis competition a good way to connect academia and business? I would like to ask if you think that organizing an international thesis competition is a good way to bridge the gap between students (mostly graduates) and companies. The idea is to have jury members of industry partners and alumni, which will have access to and judge the theses and thus:

Students and graduates will be able to make hopefully valuable connections
Businesses will profit from having an insight of what young people write about.

Is organizing a thesis competition likely to be a fruitful endeavor?

It would be very hard to judge these things due to a dearth of objective criteria. Also, getting a panel of widely knowledgeable, senior employees (whose time is short and expensive) to each read and judge at least several theses just isn't feasible - and that's assuming that the field is narrow enough that the judges have the expertise to understand every thesis.

Unless you have a vested and very specific interest in the thesis, there just isn't any point in reading it. A short presentation or abstract is really all that's necessary to get the gist of the research.

A much better solution would be a thesis presentation competition. My old university did a university-wide "thesis in three" competition every year. Entrants had three minutes to give a presentation on their research, in front of a general audience and a panel of judges from all disciplines (a more specialized competition could allocate more time).

This could have many advantages, including:

the panel will be able to view all of the presentations in less time than it takes to read just one thesis
it assesses a very valuable real-world skill: the ability to distil a complicated piece of work into a simple and exciting nutshell
you can see someone's enthusiasm for a topic
gathering for drinks and dinner after the presentations will be a fantastic networking opportunity. Job offers could be flying about all over the place.

In the age of the internet, it would be easy to ask participants to create a video presentation if they cannot attend the event (possibly even in the style of a YouTube educational video, with narrated drawings / animations). This way, no one needs to travel across the country or world.


Change of affiliation in manuscript under preparation I have submitted a paper to a journal as part of my degree at university X. This paper includes my correspondence e-mail and affiliation to the laboratory at university X, of which my co-authors were a part.

I have now moved to another university in a different country and the paper has been returned with the reviewers' comments. Should I be updating my affiliation and e-mail, especially considering that the majority of the work (the submitted draft) was completed at my old lab? I'm not sure if this is important at all, or whether it has any implications for the eventual transfer of copyright.

If you are doing the revision work at the new place you can just add the new affiliation as a second one (e.g. with 1,2).

Yes, I would update the email as there is no point in a dead old one for anybody.


PhD student and postdoc statistics related to relationships As a graduate student and postdoc, I remember more of my colleagues becoming single than entering new relationships. In many cases the problem was that their partners could not accept their unusual working hours and low wages. In some others it was the lack of solution to the "two body problem".

So, I am curious if there are compiled statistics related to number of students and postdocs in relationships and with families, number of children, divorces, and comparison to people outside academia.

This study has "postsecondary teachers" divorce rate at around 14%, and "Other education, training, and library workers" at 15.6.

For reference, "Computer scientists and systems analysts" were at 15.64.

Both were below "verage US Divorce Percentage" of 16.35.

Most occupations typically associated with financially secure lifestyles (doctors, engineers, CEOs) seem to fall <= 10%.

Most occupations not typically associated with stability or prosperity fell >= 20%.

Predictably, it appears that financial stability, on average, brings an order of magnitude increase in the stability of marriage. So all the girls looking to marry a doctor or lawyer (or engineer??) really do seem to be statistically more likely to live happily ever after ;) Likewise for all the boys looking to marry up.

In my relationship, we went through a total of 3 graduate degrees, for 2 of which we were both in school at the same time.

That definitely helped, as each of us had first-hand experience of living below subsistence level while in grad school. We were able to mitigate the inevitable adverse effect of financial insecurity on a relationship by being understanding and patient with each other; developing judicious spending habits; living below our means; and understanding that, in the long run, a relationship of the kind that we have is more important than a job, a salary, or a lifestyle.


As a supervisor, what feedback would you expect from a PhD who quits? I’m quitting my PhD. The decision has been made. The reasons boil down to diminished interest in the research subject and disappointment with the university’s managerial practices (nothing is done on time or well). A while ago I informed my supervisor about these concerns and gave him the heads up that I may be leaving after a period of self reflection. He found my concerns justified and made reasonable adjustments, what was within his power, but it finally rained down on me that no matter what I won’t pull forward the PhD.

We have an amiable professional relation and I’m sure he may be interested in knowing what went wrong and when. I also want to diminish the blow as I suspect he had put lots of hope on my research, not to mention that I was his first PhD student and my departure will be a hindrance to his tenure. He also has a bit of an ego which I'd rather keep appeased (This is in Europe, in one of the countries with more hierarchy-based academic systems.)

In hindsight, what concrete information would an experienced academician expect to get from a PhD who is leaving?

In general, I feel the two items you list already (over-)fulfill what justification you strictly speaking owe an advisor on your way out. You lost interest in your research subject, and you are disappointed with the university's managerial practices. I am not sure there is all that much more to say with regards to the first item, and it's not particularly actionable for the advisor anyway.

For the second item, I am sure he would appreciate some concrete examples of situations that you feel where inadequately handled. At the very least, this gives him ammunition for future discussions around improving managerial processes ("we already lost je_b because of situations X, Y, and Z" is a much easier to make argument towards change than an abstract "we need to improve some stuff").

The only areas where I would tread lightly is problems where he is himself the culprit, or could have reasonably made a difference but didn't. Personally, I would use the common advice from Workplace.SE here on exit interviews - don't use them as a chance to blow off some steam. The chance that you will enact positive change is low, but the probability that you burn some bridges is very high.


If there are two published versions of a paper, which one should I cite? While writing my thesis, I have encountered the following situation:

My thesis is based on the work of Gourieroux et al. (1993) who, as part of the text, cites another paper, Gourieroux and Monfort (1992). In the references to the 1993 paper this paper is listed as having been published in "CREST-Départment de la Recherche INSEE, DP No. 9214". I also need to cite this paper, but can only find a version which was published in 1995 in the journal "Econometric Theory".

My question is therefore, should I use the original citation from he 1993 paper: Gourieroux and Monfort (1992), or go with Gourieroux and Monfort (1995).

I am inclined to go with the latter, but worried it would be considered strange if I write something like "Gourieroux et al. (1993), using theory developed by Gourieroux and Monfort (1995), show...".
Thanks in advance for your help!

I favor acting in the following way:

If you've only read one of the versions, cite that one. God knows what's in the one you haven't read.
If you've read both versions:

if they are identical relative to the information you need, publication in a journal or proceedings volume takes precedence over (re)publication in a career collection (e.g., "Selected works of Jones"), which takes precedence over arxiv, which takes precedence over non-arxiv manuscripts.
if they are not identical relative to the information you need, cite whichever one contains the best version (where best probably needs to be decided on a case-by-case basis).