How valuable/impressive is a review article written by an undergraduate? I am the Graduate Coordinator of my department at my state research university.  I am currently evaluating several PhD applications for a prestigious internal fellowship.  The catch is that, while I am in the math department, I am only evaluating applications from other STEM departments.  When it comes to accomplishments in the laboratory sciences, I am often out of my depth, and I usually just admit as much and move on.  However, I've just come to something in which I wonder whether academic cultural differences could give me the wrong idea (rather than no idea).

Namely, an undergraduate student in chemistry has written a review article under the direction of a faculty coauthor. The faculty member says of the student:

  [S/he] was
  responsible for assembling the preliminary bibliography and writing the initial summaries of the
  main papers that we reviewed.  [S/he] was primarily responsible for creating the schemes and
  figures used in the paper. While I did have to heavily edit [his/her] writing, which is to be expected, [s/he] really carried a bulk of the work. Consequently, [s/he] is first author on this paper.

(I did look at the article, but I won't violate confidentiality by describing it...and moreover I am completely incapable of meaningfully evaluating it.)

My question: how valuable/impressive is it for an undergraduate in chemistry to be the first author of a review article like this?  By way of comparison, in mathematics there are almost no "review articles." The closest equivalent I know of are long articles published in the Bulletin of the American Mathematical Society, which are more like historically oriented mini-courses on a mathematical subfield written by a leading expert in the field.  This type of review article strikes more as a helpful library tool for a chemist interested in certain types of reactions and procedures. So it looks more like a moderate piece of service to the profession, and being first author sounds like the student carried out the assigned task more independently than not.

Is that accurate?  Or is it a big plus for an undergraduate to have done work like this?

There are several factors to consider here when evaluating the "significance" of a review article:

The length and scope of the review article: a six-page review of recent literature with 50 references is not as impressive as a 50-page review with hundreds of references.
The publication in which the article appears: is the journal a high-level, review-only journal, such as Reviews of Modern Physics or  Chemical Reviews, or is it a review article in a traditional journal?
Was the review invited or contributed?
Is it part of a special issue? (If so, the standards for acceptance are often a bit laxer than in a "regular" issue.)
Since it's written as an undergraduate, you might try to compare its citation count to similar review articles written around the same time as a proxy for its significance to ongoing research in the field.


How to convince and/or ask researchers to share data? I'm currently working on gathering data for my MSc thesis. The problem is, for my type of research, there is VERY limited data that is freely available. Specifically, I'm looking to acquire baseline population data for wild animal populations.

I've contacted a few organizations and NGOs asking if they have any data available and if they would be open to sharing it for a specific species.

One person seemed reluctant to share their data and wanted more information on my project - how can I convince them to share their data with me? There is hardly any other resources that have this type of information so it would really help me.

Another sent me a number of papers they've written - but what I need from them is discrete locations (GPS coordinates) that they no doubt have as they have figures in their paper. However, for my research I need precise locations and estimating them from a figure is not ideal.

This is my first run at this, so I'm trying to figure out the best way to open up data sharing and collaboration. It's really important to me - but I also know that not all researchers think similarly. Especially when, at this point in my research I'm not 100% sure what I can offer them in return as it hinges on the data I can gather. Do I offer acknowledgement or authorship on my papers? Keep them updated with my progress and try to illustrate how I could help them?

First, I suggest you to be very clear with what you are working on (which is not evident to me yet), what is your  deliverable, your time schedule, and why the data they have are important for your project.

Then, there always is something you can offer in return, that may have value for them: from a bibliographic report to innovative mapping of the data. Many people work at nice data vizualization tools that rock. Just saying, because you were talking about GPS data. We have entered a world of data science, where you can do a lot with novel tools.

Whatever the option, I would suggest to take some data you have, work on some awesome analysis method, and sent them as a pre-gift


About email contact with prospective advisors who are yet to join the institute I am a second year grad student who is trying to find advisors in two people (quite brilliant scientists!) who are going to join my grad school as faculty. They are going to be in campus only rarely now but will be full-time here from the next year.

Does this situation sound very bad or scary or depressing or something wrong?
Am I late into the game?

So I have done studies and have written up research drafts in areas related to these scientists and have been trying to get into discussions with them over emails. Both sounded quite interested in me - one of them met me for a few hours of discussion while in campus about a month ago - and the other one said "we should keep in touch and meet when I am there the next time"  etc.

But I get very scared and nervous when I don't get replies from them after even a week from the last email (stating my progress in their respective subjects)- I am always thinking if they struck me off from their mind - did they just forget me - did they decide I am not worth it etc. etc.

[...I am getting sick of just the unbearable tension of the fear of having been dropped...]

Anyway is the implicit expectation that I am going to read up all current papers in their fields and be able to come up with a paper on my own? (...thats what I am trying to do but clearly thats not easy!...) I don't know how "advising" is supposed to work with so little contact (...may be there is a culture conflict because in my previous institute one met one's professors daily and even multiple times a day at times...)

[just a side information - may be irrelevant but still for completeness of information - I think I am way ahead of my peers in terms of depth and breadth of knowledge and speed of learning new papers and my grad school grades are all at the top..]

I personally would be a little too concerned about a graduate student who keeps trying to "hard sell" themselves before I arrived. Partially this is because, if I were just starting a new position, I'd be worried about a million things, including winding down my previous employment situation, preparing for a move, figuring out all the different things that have to be done in the new position, and so on. Others may very well be different, though!

Note that I don't think it's wrong to be active when you sense a good opportunity, such as working with a scientist you hold in high regard as an advisor. However, being too aggressive may be just as damaging as being too passive. Steer clear of both extremes. For instance, have the advisors in question asked you to send them weekly updates? Have you asked them to  schedule a phone or Skype chat? Do you know if they are even "at home" or if they're on travel when they're not responding?

Advisors have their own personal styles, and your style should mesh with theirs. If it doesn't, it will likely be an unproductive and unhappy situation for both of you.


What to do if I can't find references about a listed project of my potential supervisor I am currently preparing for my graduate school application. There is one professor whose research interest in general matches mine. He has listed several potential research projects for prospective postgraduate students and I am particularly very interested in one of them, say Project A. Since Project A's scale is very broad, I planned to read some of his related publications to get familiar with the topic before I contact him via email.

The problem is I can't find any article written by him about Project A on his website or through Google. He did list some selected publications but they all seem to relate to other projects, which are different from Project A. In my view, those projects are more theoretical and related with asymptotic analysis while Project A is related with probability and stochastic modeling. I have not opened all articles to confirm my statement.

Do I overlook anything? Is it possible that a professor lists a project that he has published any related works in the past 3 years? Do it mean the professor don't want to intake students with Project A recently?

I don't want to send a email to the professor and ask for references because I think it's not polite. Currently I am searching the title of Project A and reading related publications by other professors. I have also browsed one of his papers , which is related to another project. What shall I do next? Is it proper to send an email to his current student and ask for reference?

It is completely reasonable and polite to send an email to the professor, saying that you are planning to apply to his department, you were interested by the discussion of Project A on his web page, and asking if he can tell you more about it and/or suggest further reading.


recommended and reliable proofreading services I have been using some online proofreader tools for checking for grammar issues in my writing, but I have found that the solutions they give are not so good at all.
For that reason I would like to know any human-proofreader service that somebody could recommend me. Some of the characteristics of the service that I am requiring are:

Not so expensive
Confidentiality, I do not want my article to end up published by somebody else
Reliable

Could anybody has experience with those services and could recommend me one? I need to review an article asap

Thanks

Have you tried getting the proofreading done within your own university?  This is not made explicit in your question, but my guess is that you are not a native speaker of English and you are writing in English.  If you are attending an anglophone university there will probably be places where you can just show up and get help on proofreading your paper (the humanities version of drop-in tutoring).  So I'm assuming that you are not attending an anglophone university.  But at (almost?) any university there should be faculty and students who are working on English writing specifically. Can you find a student who is willing to help you?  Perhaps you may even be able to offer some other academic service to the student in exchange.


How to organize content of slides for a conference presentation? I am going to attend my first IEEE conference on Electronic Design/Verification and am feeling quite nervous about my first oral presentation.

I want to make sure to "sell" my point and ensure all questions are being tackled, and so I am looking for advice related to the organization of my slides. For example,

How can the slide material  complement my speaking?
How do I ensure that the end-product is not dry/heavy?
If my work is on for example, SRAM or Post-silicon technologies,is it recommended to begin my presentation with a foil on a collage of the latest news snippets about these topics? This could probably draw their attention rather than picking up some lines from my camera-ready's introduction section.
Also, how many slides should I ideally allocate for each section of my paper?

I am forced to ask such "trivial" questions as my Professor is on a sabbatical currently and has little/no access to mail for the next few weeks.
I have searched the Internet and found some generic advice, like "How to give a bad talk" by David Patterson.

There are some related questions on this site that do not seem to directly address how to organize the content of the slides. How to do a flawless and natural presentation? asks about becoming a more effective orator. Inspiration for great presentations asks about effective design elements (not content organization) for slides.

It is better to finish early than late (if they would let you). Do not
try to say too much. Then try to be informal, to give a feeling and
intuitive understanding for what you are doing. If you include an
equation, you probably want to explain it informally. It is often unlikely
that most people will follow details that are too technical.

Part, or all, of the presentation is really advertising for the
paper. Make then understand the concepts, and why it is interesting
and new. But you should probably skip the technical details of proofs
or programs.  However, relating your work to existing work is
important: the audience will want to understand why they should spend
time reading you paper, what advances they will get beyond what they
already know.  If they are interested in a specific detail they
consider crucial, they will as a question. But you are unlikely to
know in advance what it will be.

Remember, you will not tell your whole paper in one talk. Else the
talk would be longer, or the paper shorter.

If you think that some details are important and that you may have
question about them, though they would overload your talk, you can
prepare slides to answer questions about them. And you use them if
needed.  But do not mix them with the other slides, put them at the
end.

Your PDF (PDF is generally accepted) should be organized so that you do not have to think about it
during the talk. You will be busy enough.


Do US REU programs sponsor the student visas (J1 or F1) for international candidates? US REU programs sometimes accept "self-funded" international students. However, do they also sponsor the student visa (J1 or F1) for the selected international candidates? Or do the students have to use a tourist visa? (From what I read so far, using a tourist visa for that purpose would not be legal as REU programs fall in the "internship" or "training" category.)

Edit:

I noticed that the J1 requires that 51% of funding come from either the hosting institute or some external source. So I suppose the J1 wouldn't be applicable for international students. However, as far as I understand, the F1 is only applicable for students enrolled in a degree course in the US. So is there no visa that would be applicable for international students willing to participate in a US REU program? That seems contradictory as many REU programs clearly mention that they are open to international applicants. [Source]

All official participants in NSF REU programs must be US citizens or permanent residents per the NSF REU homepage:

  Undergraduate students supported with NSF funds must be citizens or permanent residents of the United States or its possessions.

A self-funded student or non-NSF REU funded student would simply be an intern or student at the host institution.


Is it normal that research institutes do not hire their own PhDs for postdoc positions? The institute where I'm doing my PhD has a formal policy not to hire local PhD graduates as postdocs. Is this normal?

I live in Europe.

As far as I know, there are no official rules prohibiting institutes, universities or even labs to hire former PhD students as post-doc. Sometimes, a supervisor might hire you for a short period of time as Research Associate to wrap up papers and finish work at the lab, but this typically does not exceed 6 months to a year and should be considered to be part of the PhD work.

That said, although there are always exceptions, in general it is a pretty bad idea to do a post-doc at the same lab or department as your PhD. Some people even consider it to show a lack of ambition, competence and motivation; and I've been told it is frowned upon by hiring committees.

Successfully completing a PhD is the endpoint of an apprenticeship relation with the PI and lab. A post-doc is an opportunity to break that relation and take the experience and knowledge from your PhD to perform more independent research, build a new network, diverge into other topics, and experience a different lab culture.


Documentation or evaluation instruments used for accreditation of CS programs under The Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology (ABET)? I was wondering if there is a repository about the documentation or evaluation instruments that are used for accreditation of CS programs under The Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology (ABET)? I mean it could be real data or examples on how an accreditation process is made. I know that there is some material on the ABET website, but it is very general.
Any help?

In my experience (Aerospace Engineering), the documentation provided to ABET during the accreditation process was stored in large binders, copies of which ended up on bookshelves in various conference rooms around the department. If you are able to visit an accredited department, you might be able to see them in person there. The CS department at my university is/was not ABET accredited, though the ECE department is. I don't know how either of those department treats their accreditation materials, but the ASE department left them lying all over for anyone off the street to see (more or less).


Can I defer a math postdoc for a year till I complete my current postdoc? I currently have a postdoc position at University X. Now, I was wondering: if I apply to math postdocs advertised by the departments in the U.S. (sth. like Szego Assistant, Benjamin Peirce etc.), would I be able to accept such a postdoc position and defer it by one year to continue my postdoc at Uni X, or is this in general impossible?
I think I've seen people doing this where they would spend one year at let's say IAS or MSRI, but I am not entirely sure if such a procedure can be negotiated or whether it is rather unlikely.

Maybe. You can't know in advance since it depends on the department's source of money, teaching needs, etc. If you apply for a position, you should at least be ready take it. You can bring up the idea of deferment, and you may get it, but you also have to be in a position to actually start when the job starts.


Should I provide an opinion on a graduate school candidate without being asked by the candidate? I've been contacted by email by another professor at a different institution, who is assessing a student for graduate school entry, for an informal opinion about the student's suitability. The student hasn't asked me directly for a recommendation or similar.

Is it ethical for me to provide that informal opinion without informing the student? Does whether the opinion would be positive or negative make a difference?

I'm reasonably sure there are no legal issues involved, so I'm just interested in the ethical considerations.

It does not make a difference whether your review would be positive or negative, and it is your duty to keep your discussions about the student confidential. Should you choose to review their application, you should not tell the student or anyone not involved in the process that you are doing so.

You are being asked to help your university, or maybe just a professor who trusts you, to help with their admissions and hiring process. You should take it seriously and give an honest review if you can. If you don't feel like you can be objective in your review (maybe the student is a friend or colleague), then you should decline to do so. But I don't feel like there's an ethical issue in the applicant not knowing that you've been asked about them.


What is the difference between a teaching assistant and an instructor? It seems to me that the terms "Teaching Assistant" and "Instructor" refer to a variety of positions. At some places, a teaching assistant is responsible for things like helping the actual lecturer by handing out papers, grading homework, etc., and instructors hold recitation sessions.

At other places, I saw the term "instructor" referring to the lecturer giving the course, while a teaching assistant is the person doing anything else (recitations, grading etc.).

Is there some widely accepted definition of the two positions?

For context: The question arose because I wasn't sure whether I'm using the correct terms in my CV -- I am a math graduate student, and I would like to make a distinction between jobs in which I only graded course assignments/final exams, and courses in which I held recitation classes* (and also participated in grading the final exams). Is it OK to use "Instructor" for the latter? What should the former be referred to as?

*In the course I'm currently teaching, the recitations are planned and written by the ones giving them (without the professors' supervision). Also, the people giving the recitations are not necessarily grad students (some already hold a PhD). I'm elaborating on that because from what I've seen, some of it could be relevant for the definition of the job.

No, there really is no universal definition of the terms; I have been a "teaching assistant" and an "instructor" at the same school for basically the same position.

The only thing that I would say is that the term "teaching assistant" tends to imply a position that does not have significant lecturing responsibilities, although she may be responsible for nearly everything else in the course (creating and grading homework and exam problems, interacting with students, conducting recitations sections, and so on). Note that this does not mean that the TA might not carry out a "spot lecture" or two; but this is not an expectation of the position overall.

In general, I would avoid this problem by doing two things:

Listing on my CV the "job title" that the school assigns to the role you carried out.
Provide a short list of the duties your position entailed.

In this way, there is no ambiguity or misconception that can result, since you're providing all the information needed to understand the breadth of your teaching experience.


Should I mention about my governmental-funded PhD scholarship which I don't want to use This might sound odd, yet here is my story. I was lucky to get governmental scholarship (GSch) for 4-5 years of PhD to study abroad. But It requires student to work as Assistant Professor in a relatively smaller university in my homeland for 8-10 years afterwards. Which I would not like myself bound to after my PhD.

This is an advantage for sure to get admission in a top university. But by myself (without using GSch), I might also get funded by TA/RA. In that case, I wouldn't use GSch.

Should I mention GSch in the first contact with PIs or in PhD applications (i.e. in SOP)? I am asking this because once I inform them about GSch, it is unlikely to get TA/RA funds even though I deserve. I also don't want to lose the chance of PhD in a top university, I use GSch if needed. So there is a trade-off.

I can think of three possibility:

1 - Mentioning the GSch in the first contact, hoping that they will promise funding anyway if they this I deserve.

2 - Mentioning it in the first contact as it is a possibility.

3 - Sending another email and mention it if they reject me because of lack of funding (Would they say it is lack of funding?).

P.S. : I am planning to apply mostly to positions in U.S.

P.S.2 : Sorry for bad English level, edits are welcome.

Edit : If I decide not to get back to my country, I have to pay scholarship in 5 years with ~50% interest.

This is a tricky situation.  If you mention the scholarship without explaining your reservations, then it might help you get admitted, but you'll be admitted with the understanding that you'll use this scholarship.  Not having to pay for you is exactly why it could give you an advantage, so the department would probably be upset to learn that you didn't plan to use it.  It would feel like a form of cheating, and you might face pressure (such as withholding other sources of funding on the grounds that you had this scholarship available).

If you don't mention it, then you don't have to use it but it won't help you.

Sadly, there's not much room in between these possibilities.  You could try mentioning it but explaining your reservations about using the scholarship.  However, this isn't likely to help your chances (nobody cares about the scholarship if you won't actually use it), and it might create an awkward situation if they try to convince you to use it.

  I also don't want to lose the chance of PhD in a top university, I use GSch if needed.

This is a judgment call you'll have to make regarding when to reveal the scholarship.

  Sending another email and mention it if they reject me because of lack of funding (Would they say it is lack of funding?).

Probably not.  At least in my experience, rejected candidates are not given a specific explanation.  On the other hand, you might end up on a waiting list, where you may be admitted if a suitable spot opens up (for example, if someone else turns down an offer).  That could be a time when revealing the scholarship would help your chances, if you are willing to use it.


Research jobs in industry I have earned a PhD last year in materials science (semiconductor processing). Now I find myself in a job where most of the work is managing other people. To mee it seems like most of my former colleagues at university share the same fate.

What are your experiences? Have some of you found a job in industrial research which is really hands on like at university?
In particular I am interested in the field of semiconductor processing.

Consider technical staff jobs at a national lab.

That being said, the post-docs in my groups have had to learn that the technologists should be doing much of the hands-on work. That is what they are there for, that is what they are good at. The techs may need hands-on help for really new stuff, but they should do the vast majority of day-to-day stuff in the lab.

You, the PhD staff member, are not paid to optimize beam, or machine and build something. You are paid to think up new research topics, get funding for those, and oversee the project to successful completion (whether or not that includes publications). Yes, you get to think deep thoughts and analyze the data generated by the techs. Even then, the very best techs will do most of the data analysis for you. If somebody else can do it, let them - you should be doing the things nobody else can do.


How to reply to a claim that a paper is "obvious" and "not interesting"? A month ago I received the referees' comments on a paper: two are positive, but the other one is negative. In particular, there is a very "negative" comment in this report:

  All of the physical effects considered here have been considered before,
  and model equation is an obvious and not especially interesting
  generalization of similar equations elsewhere in the literature.

How can I give an appropriate reply to this comment?

Well if you disagree with the comment, then you offer a sound, well-reasoned counterargument that addresses the concerns.  If your equation is interesting, then why?  If it is not obvious, then why?  Do these alleged equations/models only look similar, but in fact there's a deeper and possibly subtle distinction?  If so, point it out.  Non-combatively.

These are the sorts of things that often get addressed in the introduction.  Possibly the remark is ultimately a reflection on your paper having a weak introduction that fails to address the "what's new here and why should I care?" questions with sufficient flair, clarity, and authority.  More than one legitimately good paper (to whatever extent such a benchmark exists objectively) has been rejected because the authors failed to do an adequate job of "selling" and explaining the paper in the abstract and introduction.

Of course, there's also the possibility that the remark is spot-on.  One reason journals tend to use multiple referees is because there's no guarantee that any one expert has authoritative and unbiased knowledge on whatever bits of arcana your paper is using.  Nor is there a guarantee for two, or three, or whatever, but the odds are better that if something is "wrong" from the standards of the journal then it will be found.

A literature review is the way to delve into this possibility.  "Elsewhere in the literature" would suggest to me that the reviewer believes you have intentionally or accidentally excluded some important pieces of the literature, and this can only be resolved by looking further into the literature (and possibly asking colleagues if they know of anything that might seem relevant).

If ultimately you end up agreeing with the comments, in part or in whole, that can be a tough pill to swallow, but reality is what it is.  You can still try to rewrite portions of the paper to properly address preceding similar work and argue why yours is in some sense novel, interesting, and/or useful.  And then you either hope this placates the negative reviewer sufficiently to earn acceptance, or you submit it to some other journal after a rejection.  "Minor generalizations" are sometimes simply not up to snuff for certain journal standards, while it is well within that of others.


Is being an event planner also part of being an academician? How do you cope? My question is, is being event planners every semester (unrelated to deep research) considered part of being an academician? And how do you navigate or balance all of your tasks (including organizing events, teaching preparation, revamping teaching strategies, supervision, research and also family life)?
Context (you don't need to read if you don't want to):
From my observation, the culture of my university (a teaching university in South-East Asia country) and faculty is to engage in community services and organizing lots of events unrelated to deep research. Not much effort is made to make deep research, if any, it would only be grants with direction to commercialization and business.
Most of these tasks of organizing events are pushed to the assistant professors, aside from administrative academicians, especially the new staffs. If the events involve organizing conference, the research involved is usually superficial and they are just for gathering participants. The tasks are usually low-level tasks including menial clerk tasks, logistic management, financial management, and other tasks included when organizing events, not only chairing sessions. (Chairing sessions looks wonderful in comparison). They are not that difficult but they are a lot and taking too much time, months or even a year, and not contributing much to our performance index.
These new assistant professors don't have enough time to prepare for teaching (9 to 12 teaching hours) and redesigning teaching strategies, let alone doing deep and meaningful research. I've tried googling about academic workload, but they are mostly about teaching and research, which from my perspective, is quite wonderful, compared to be spammed by menial tasks of becoming event planners every year.
I've tried voicing out this opinion to my faculty members and administrative academicians, but I get the feeling that they do not agree with it. Since we don't have many staffs, they need every help they could muster, and maybe organizing events comes naturally to them. The advantage is we might get jobs as 'experienced' event planners if we would like to opt out of academia :)
Would love to hear any insight to fix my way of thinking on how to cope. Thank you.

I don't see this situation as "normal" in any sense. However...
It is probably a very good idea that your university is doing these sorts of outreach and community events. I would support that. But not on the backs of new faculty. But it also depends quite a lot on the local reward structure. If a new faculty member can reach tenured/permanent status from such things rather than a publication record and good teaching, then it is fairly benign. It is just part of the inherent value system of that place.
On the other hand, it doesn't prepare you well to move to another academic position at another university, who probably have a more traditional view of the proper activities of new faculty.
In lots of places, such "event planning" is taken on by senior faculty, actually, who have withdrawn a bit from research after a long career, or who have the publication pipeline operating at capacity anyway. Most of the people I interacted with on conference committees, for example, weren't junior faculty. Nor do "most" faculty engage in such activities.
But if your own career trajectory as you see it depends on publications, then you are probably at the wrong place and should be seeking an exit. While it is, I think, a valuable service in general, it isn't helping your career. There are, actually, places that put high priority on supporting the career needs of junior faculty. In most places, while "service" is a value, it is considered secondary to research, especially, and teaching.


Why are some journals for research papers called “review”? There are many journals from different fields feature the word review in their name even though they are mostly featuring research articles – and not review articles, book reviews or similar. Some do not even accept review articles at all.
Some examples are
the Physical Review series,
Geographical Review,
Drug and Alcohol Review,
Victorian Periodicals Review, and
The Linguistic Review.

The only thing in this journal that is somehow connected to review is the peer-review and the consequential revision of the articles, but if this feature were eponymous, I would expect names like Physical Reviewed.

The very sparse information about the history of these journals reveiled nothing about the motivation for naming them such, and neither did dictionaries. For example, from Merriam–Webster’s definitions of review:

  […]

  3 : a general survey (as of the events of a period)

  4 : an act or the process of reviewing

  […]

  6 a : a critical evaluation (as of a book or play)
     b :  a magazine devoted chiefly to reviews and essays

  7 a : a retrospective view or survey (as of one's life)
     b (1) : renewed study of material previously studied (2) : an exercise facilitating such study

  […]

None of these fits the aforementioned journals. They aren’t surveys, evaluations, devoted to reviews and essays, retrospective or renewed studies, nor do they contain them.

Why are these journals called review?

Among the various meaning of review, the Oxford English Dictionary reports (2.1):

  [OFTEN IN NAMES] A periodical publication with critical articles on culture and current events:
  'the New Left Review'

A similar definition can be also found in the Random House Webster's, 2nd ed., (on paper):

  A periodical publication containing articles on current events or affairs, books, art, etc.

The above definitions do not seem to imply journals publishing only review papers in the common scientific sense.

The Online Etymology Dictionary yields for review (bold mine):

  mid-15c., "an inspection of military forces," from Middle French reveue "a reviewing, review," noun use of fem. past participle of reveeir "to see again, go to see again," from Latin revidere, from re- "again" (see re-) + videre "to see" (see vision). Sense of "process of going over again" is from 1560s; that of "a view of the past, a retrospective survey" is from c. 1600. Meaning "general examination or criticism of a recent work" is first attested 1640s.

I think that journal papers can be considered "examinations of a recent work", that is, a review in the sense highlighted above.

It is worth noting that this usage of the noun review to denote a periodical publication is widespread also in other languages: in French, with the word revue, and in Italian with the word rivista. The note at the top of the last link says (lousy translation mine):

  nel sign. di «periodico» è modellato sul fr. revue, che a sua volta
  ricalca l’ingl. review

  (with the meaning of "periodical", the term is modelled on the French
  revue which, in turn, follows from the English review)


Is writing a research paper necessary for thesis? I'm from Computer Science field and usually I've seen students are required to publish a few research papers to be eligible for writing a thesis. I'm talking about masters level thesis here.

As far as I know the rationale behind this is that research papers are usually well evaluated by the conference committee but what if someone's  research doesn't get published?

I'm assuming their research to be good enough but is rejected by conference people because they had better alternatives.

Are they eligible to write the thesis? They don't usually allow it in my college. Is it the case everywhere?

If the answer goes along the line that it must be acceptable in a lower rated conference then why go for external evaluations anyway since I've heard they have poor evaluations.

Are [students required to publish to be] eligible to write the thesis?

No, this is institution dependent.


Is using the description of an award as-is in a CV considered plagiarism? When applying to graduate programs, most universities ask for a CV. If one has to provide the description of awards they received in their CV, will it be considered plagiarism if they use the official descriptions of the awards verbatim?

[The descriptions are just one sentence long, and rephrasing them too much tends to alter their meaning. The descriptions of these awards on the websites of the institutes granting them have been worded very carefully, which makes them seem to be the best way to convey the corresponding award's purpose.]

Edit: Would it be safer to include a footnote that says that these are the official descriptions, verbatim?

Definitely not.

Plagiarism is the use, in an academic, creative or intellectual context, of someone else's ideas or distinctive language, without proper attribution.  It follows from this that in some forms of writing it is not possible to plagiarize: for instance, you cannot plagiarize in a lease or customer service agreement or in wedding thank you cards.

A CV is an academic document, but it is not the kind of academic document having a blanket premise of originality in regard to its writing.  For instance, the formatting of a CV is usually taken from someone else's template...and that's completely okay because no one is expecting your CV to be formatted in a new, original way -- on the contrary, the formatting of a CV should largely conform to agreed upon academic cultural norms.

There is some small amount of room for "creative writing" in a CV, but it does not lie in the description of awards you've won.  Anyone reading your CV would expect that you have attempted to describe the awards in a very standard way.  If that means copying the official text of the awards: no problem at all.


At what point is someone considered too old (in terms of experience) for an Assistant Professor position? I competed for an Assist. Prof. in Greece with someone with 12+ years experience since PhD. Suffice it to say that it did not turn out well for me (4 years of experience) or other interviewees for that matter, even though many of us had the better* research output in terms of quality, ranked venues, and achievements (3rd party grants and so on), but clearly not as many citations as we do not exist long enough in the field.
It also did not help that the committee favorite had their BSc, MSc, and PhD in that same university, and 12+ of postdoc in a partner lab in the vicinity.
But, anyway, I asked the committee the following question, which I also pose here: At which point (if there is such a point) is someone considered too old (in terms of experience) for an Assist. Prof. position?
They told me that the favorite had a higher citation count, so even if they were 60 years in the field they would still rank them first because of that. In my opinion, even though that might well be legal, it does not seem very ethical to me.
I am under the impression that an Assist. Prof. position is an entry level position where you are supposed to form your own lab, attract early-career grants to help you with that (which have experience-age restrictions), and work towards becoming a professor.
*As an example, I will simply say that the position was on AI with a focus on Knowledge Representation and Reasoning, and the committee favorite had 0 articles in IJCAI, AAAI, KR, AIJ, or JAIR, whereas I had 6.

No sane committee is ever going to turn down a candidate solely for being 'too experienced', and it is rarely meaningful to reduce someone's CV and accumulated experience to just a few numbers. However, this comes with some qualifications:

If someone is reaching career milestones (e.g. first Asst. Prof. job) much later than the norm, a committee might question why, and whether this is a sign that future development will be slow.
If someone is applying for a job that is 'too junior' for them, committees might be concerned that either (i) they're not really a serious applicant, or (ii) that they'll quit as soon as something better comes along.
By definition, if someone has more experience, then the committee has more information on which to base a decision. Junior candidates often have to be assessed in terms of 'potential for success' rather than 'evidence of success'. This can count for or against the more experienced applicant: some committees may prefer to gamble on a rising star, others may prefer the security of an established candidate.
Hiring decisions (just as everything else) are influenced by many external factors. Everything from financial considerations (experienced candidate may cost more) through to government policy (how candidate's metrics would influence the university's ranking and hence income) may help sway a decision for or against a particular candidate.


What to do if I cannot complete my Masters dissertation tasks? I am doing my masters in the UK and at final stage of my dissertation. First I will have to confess that I regret that I selected this dissertation as it is something which I failed to get a clear idea about. I don't know if it is because I cannot understand the ideas that my supervisor is trying to communicate with me.
First my target was to implement an algorithm (I was given only a specific field and asked me to select an algorithm) using a language that I had never used before. I used to meet  regularly and given research papers to read to clarify any doubt I had. There was no support in the implementation other than the research papers. Also no one to guide  on the computer language I needed to use for the implementation.  By June, I was stuck a little bit in the implementation and when I expressed some doubts, I was told there is not enough time for implementation now as I am not able to understand it so take an existing software which implemented the said algorithm and create some performance improvements.
I spent a lot of time, more than a month for just setting up the work environment and understanding how that software works. I am not very confident to speak out so I thought I will eventually get a hang of it. After a thorough research I realised that the said software is widely used all over the world and has been optimised in all possible ways already. But it was already too late and at the end I am left with almost nothing but some failed trials. Now the deadline to submit my masters dissertation is in a week and when I spoke to my supervisor about the limitations of the software and why I cannot optimise it last week, I was given  a new research paper to read and asked  to try their approach.
I learned a lot in this research, many algorithms, some new software, computer languages etc, but it was not focussed. I don't know what I will write in my report as the project is supposed to be a study with evaluation and testing to show as a proof to my conclusions. I have already written a literature review of 35 pages and about 10 pages about the software I am trying to optimise. I cannot submit just that and I don't think it is a good idea to continue new trials now as I may not be able to complete writing my report (which needs to be around 60-65 pages) with just one week left.  I have distinction from the marks for my course units and all of the effort I took for an year will go in vain if I fail the dissertation as it has 50% weighting. What can I do to make sure I will pass my dissertation? Please advise.
NB: I know it is a long question, sorry about that. I felt I need to write the context to explain my situation.

Postscript:
I continued and completed my thesis with all the failed trials. Added some sections in the thesis comparing the different approaches I tried, findings based the trials and some suggestions for future work. Even though I was paranoid till the results came out, I passed with distinction.

The unpleasant reality is that it is entirely possible that you may not pass your dissertation. In fact, given what you've written here, I would be surprised if you did as of right now.

Graduate level work is hard. I mean if research were easy everyone would be doing it right? And so some of the things Graduate students need to learn early in their career is time management, planning and asking for help as needed. In an ideal world your advisor would have caught your floundering much earlier in the process but academia, as life, isn't always ideal. A good rule of thumb is if, by the halfway point of your timeline(so 1 year into a 2 year Masters for example) you don't have a solid plan for accomplishing your goal that includes timelines, goalposts and a plan to catch up on additional material you need... then you have a problem.

By June, then, warning bells should have been going off in your head. I have some sympathy(everyone has to learn this stuff on their own at some point) but not too much. Part of graduate level Computer Science work, at least, means figuring out languages and implementations on your own. It sounds like you were looking for something a little more guided, more like undergraduate courses, but that's not how it works for Graduate level research. That you are a week out and just now casting about for a solution, that you, after running into the exact same problem when asking for help too late in June, just now found out that you could not implement improvements on a preexisting software suite... these are massively problematic. Ideally after the issues in June you should have chosen low hanging fruit for your last ditch effort of improving someone elses' suite. The first thing your lit review on that software suite should have contained is a list of potential pitfalls or limitations of the software and rough ideas on improvements.

Now that's all rather negative. I've written it because, from what you've written, you seem to not get what the fundamental problem has been for your research experience. All that being said there may still be solutions but it's going to be hard work.

It sounds like these implementations(different softwares) are focused on a particular field or topic. An option, a hard to do going to take overnights for the next week, option would be to do benchmarks and comparisons of currently available software. A study of the limitations and weaknesses(and strengths) of currently available software can be a viable topic. That it took you a month to set up the environment to run the software you were trying to improve means that this would potentially be very hard for you to do in a week. An option is to take the software you have now and run exhaustive benchmarks and analysis on that specific software.

I'm not suggesting this as a 'run out and do it now!' sort of thing. Honestly even the most on-the-ball student who has had no issues would be hard pressed to write a decent dissertation in a week. That's a student who has all of their data. But a passing dissertation is a possiblity. Your first step is to go talk to your advisor as soon as possible. Explain the current situation, explain a potential solution(exhaustive benchmarks on a particular software or comparative benchmarks between different software implementations) and, finally, explain what you are going to do to make sure that the day before the dissertation is due you won't have another emergency situation like you have right now.


Comma before end quote in bibliography Why is it correct to use comma after paper title and before end quote?

For example:
[X] A. Author, "Paper title ," Journal, vol. X, no. XX, pp. XXX-XXX, Year XXXX.

It seems natural to use it after end quote.

As others have indicated, style guidelines have to be followed, regardless of whether the reasoning behind the rules is clear. However, this particular example often varies by geographic region. American English grammar always places periods and commas inside quotation marks, while British English grammar is "conditional" - that is, they include periods and commas inside quotes only if it is part of the quotation, not the larger sentence. This site has an example and a more detailed explanation.

http://www.quickanddirtytips.com/education/grammar/quotation-marks-with-periods-and-commas

Thus, it's possible that the style guide is based on American English grammar, while you have a different frame of reference and convention.


MSc. Eng. thesis - Failed experiment - How to put it in the thesis? I'm currently writing a thesis. I'm simulating a problem using CFD model. The model has been validated by using it to investigate similar problem with known results. The model vs. experimental results are showing good consistency.

As for my problem, I've modeled it and I've got the results.
I've spent few weeks designing, building and testing the experimental equipment but I've concluded the experimental equipment must be rebuilt using different components and I don't have time.

So, where in the paper do I report the failed experiment and how do I put it in words that it failed?

Here is the main structure of my paper.

1: Introduction

2: Literature Review

3: Method.

3:1 Model observation

3:2 Experimental observation

4: Results and discussion

4:1 Model validation

4:2 Problem Results (Here I was going to compare model vs. experiment)

4:3 Discussion

5: Conclusion and future work.

You need a slight mental twist. Your experiment was not a failure. The purpose of an experiment is to ask the real world a question, and unexpected answers from the real world are at least as interesting as ones you expected.

The question you asked the real world was "Does this experimental set-up work for Problem X?". The short answer to the question, based on your experiments, is "No". Of course, you will go into a lot more detail in your thesis.

The early sections of your thesis will be much the same as they would have been if you had got the results you expected.

In 4:2, you describe your tests of your experimental set-up. To the extent that you got results at all, you do compare them to the model.

In 4:3 you discuss what you learned from building and testing your experimental equipment. If you are getting different results from model and experiment, you need to discuss why the model is more reliable than the experiment. One learns more from unexpected results than from expected ones, so this section will be richer and more interesting than it would have been if you had got the results you expected.

Your question contains the outline for "Conclusion and future work", easily identified through the keyword "concluded":

  I've concluded the experimental equipment must be rebuilt using
  different components

The conclusion is that the equipment you built is not suitable for your problem. The future work is to rebuild it using different components. Again, you need to go into a lot more detail. What aspects of your set-up were unsuitable? Why do you think particular changes might improve it?


Differences between SSRN, arXiv, academia.edu, NBER working papers, et al Posting papers on depositories for working papers may lead to higher visibility than posting on a personal website. The depositories send out updates about new papers and people browse uploaded papers.

That being said, what are the relative benefits of the different depositories? Some of them are more discipline-specific, but I work broadly in social science and any of them could work for researchers like me.

As a general rule, you should write in some medium if you read that medium. So you should send your work to a depository if you follow that depository. (See this advice on cross-listing in arXiv.)
If you do not follow any, start following them. If you follow several, choose the one that you prefer as a reader.


Should sections of a chapter have introductions and conclusions? Consider the following situation:
The review of the literature chapter has seven sections: the first one is for the introduction, the five medial are for different themes, the last one for the conclusion.

In writing the five medial sections, should I write an introduction and conclusion for each or just paragraphs discussing certain points?

Everything that you write should be justified by the goals of the document. Introductions, conclusions and "linking" material between sections are written in order to support your overall argument (for example, by summarizing higher-level ideas) or to assist the reader (for example, by letting them know something about what they are about to read). So you need to think about the needs of each part of your document, and how the whole thing fits together, to discover where introductions and conclusions ought to be placed.

Introductory material does not need to be very long, and it does not need to occupy its own section. Within a chapter, it's perfectly fine to have a short introductory passage before the first numbered section. For smaller divisions of your document, it's likely that you don't need to say very much in the way of introduction. When you find yourself writing an introductory sentence that doesn't add anything to the section heading, you are better off just omitting that sentence.

Readers can be served by short "hints" at the beginning or end of a section, that explain how the topics are linked together. This sort of thing lets you move more smoothly from one topic to another, and makes your overall argument more coherent. Without using many words, you can let readers know whether the new topic is:

A later counterargument to the material in the previous section.
A supporting argument from a different perspective.
An additional example of the same thing we have just seen.
Superficially different, but actually the same underneath.
etc.

This is much better than having a template introductory sentence that just says "This section is about ..." without giving any indication how the section fits in to the overall structure.

Conclusions are the same: for a short section, there's no need to sum up what's just been said. That doesn't add anything. In particular, for a literature review chapter, you are likely to be better off having a general conclusion to the chapter (if there is a conclusion at all), rather than a separate conclusion in each section.


Should the length of a research statement and a teaching statement be the same? I am applying to a faculty position that emphasizes both research and undergraduate teaching. The application asks for a research statement and a teaching statement.I realize that both documents are usually recommended to be 1-2 pages long and that you should always err on the side of brevity.
My question is: would it be an issue if the lengths of the 2 documents are significantly different? For example, if my teaching statement is 2 pages but my research statement is only 1 page. Will a hiring committee automatically view this as the candidate being unbalanced? In other words, does disparity in length between the 2 documents outweigh the content of the documents?
Lastly, would it make a difference depending on the emphasis of the program? For example, should the research statement always be longer (or as long as) a teaching statement if the school places greater emphasis on research (and vice versa)?

I'm not sure why you think that a research statement should be 1-2 pages.  The length of a research statement depends both on the academic field and (to a lesser extent) on the type of institution one is applying to.  In my experience, when a research statement that is only 1-2 pages long is desired, the position posting will mention that explicitly, often using slightly different language ("research summary").

In my field -- mathematics -- if a length of 1-2 pages is not explicitly asked for, then 1-2 pages would be distressingly short, to the extent of jeopardizing your chances.  I would put 4-6 pages as a more reasonable range for those applying for junior faculty positions.  (More senior people can submit longer statements, but after a point people will stop reading.)

To be specific, I have been closely involved with the job search of two junior colleagues, in mathematics.  Both are interested in finding a "faculty position that emphasizes both research and undergraduate teaching."  Each of their research statements was about 4 pages plus references.  They have each done very well on the job market -- on-campus interviews from both large universities and top liberal arts colleges, and one already has a good job offer.  I would not want any student, mentee or junior colleague of mine to send out a 1-2 page research statement until they convinced me that this length was specifically wanted by the institution they're applying to.

  My question is: would it be an issue if the lengths of the 2 documents are significantly different?

In my experience -- which is centered at a math department at a state research university -- research statements are generally 2-3 times longer than teaching statements.  The only teaching statement I've ever seen that was approximately the same length as a research statement was my own.  (Regular readers of this site will be shocked to learn that I can be seduced by the sound of my own written voice.  Only over long years and after reading, writing and refereeing many technical papers have I come to a halfway decent appreciation of the virtues of brevity.)

  My question is: would it be an issue if the lengths of the 2 documents are significantly different? For example, if my teaching statement is 2 pages but my research statement is only 1 page.

To me, someone whose teaching statement is twice as long as their research statement is signalling in the strongest possible terms that they are more interested in teaching than research...i.e., up to the point where they may not be doing much post-PhD research at all.  But again: please check on your local academic culture.

  Will a hiring committee automatically view this as the candidate being unbalanced?

Not automatically, no.

  In other words, does disparity in length between the two documents outweigh the content of the documents?

No, the content is most important.  If in your one page research statement you give a clear description of very strong research, people who were expecting a much longer document will think "What a short research statement.  That's weird.  But it sounds good -- let me check the CV / publication list / candidate's webpage for more details."

Added: I'm finding some evidence online pointing to the possibility that research statements in mathematics may be longer than in many other academic fields:

This source advises that research statements in CS should be 2-3 pages.
This source suggests that research statements should be 1-2 pages.  Upon questioning, it becomes clear that the advice is scoped only for the humanities.

Anyway, you should definitely not choose the length of your research statement by what some internet academic tells you!  You should do so by (i) talking to your thesis advisor about it and (ii) comparing notes with others who are or recently were on the job market.  Getting a look at application materials of those who recently got the type of job that you want is ideal.  That's what friends are for.


Transferring PhD programs due to parent's sickness I am a PhD student that has just started my third year in a scientific field. Since I have started my program, my mother has been diagnosed with a serious form of cancer. It has recently gotten worse and I am worried sick. I am considering applying to another PhD program that would be much closer to home.

This other department would also meet my research interests better than the current one. I have not been super excited about my current research so that is a factor in my consideration too (although I was not seriously considering leaving before this happened). I am much better aware of my research interests now than when I first applied to graduate school, since my undergraduate degree was in a different field.

I should mention that the program that I would be applying to is generally higher ranked, although my current one is respectable too. I have not applied to that department before. I have four publications, two first-author papers in good journals and one in Science (not first author). My advisor is very well-known and is very sympathetic to my situation. I have not discussed the possible transfer yet and although they would be saddened if I left, I'm sure they would write a great reference letter. My grades in the PhD program are not outstanding since I was mostly focused on research. I will likely have my master's degree by the time I would be applying in the winter.

I know transferring PhD programs is generally not easy, especially when it's to a more prestigious department, and given that by the time I would start I will have completed 3 years at my current department. But considering my situation and my publication record, how understanding would an admissions committee be? Does anyone have any experience with a similar situation or advice?

Thank you so much.

Advisors are humans too (at least most of them). Most would be willing to think with you to find creative solutions. Maybe you can stay with your old institution, but arrange for you to visit the new institution. I my old institution a couple of months in another institution was mandatory. So you can keep the progress you have made and still spent some time closer to your family. Maybe, you and your current advisor can arrange for someone from the other institution to become your co-advisor. This might enable you to regularly travel back and forth as part of your normal work, and combine that with family visits.

If people are willing a lot is possible, and in situations like yours a lot of people are willing. So my advise is talk to your advisor. Don't limit yourself to that new institution. Your primary aim is to spent time with your family, and the new institution was one possible way of achieving that. Maybe your advisor has other ideas on how to achieve your aim that work out better.


Harvard referencing bibliography - must the year be in brackets? Almost all Harvard referencing resources seem to teach that the reference in the list or bibliography should be:
Name, I. (2020). Title in italics. Place: Publisher.
However, Microsoft Word formats it without the brackets on the year, and uses a comma:
Name, I., 2020. Title in italics. Place: Publisher.
This discrepancy is seen on other citation builders, too. Citethisforme's 'Ultimate Guide' uses the brackets, but actually building a reference using the builder tool on that same website omits the brackets.
A completed citation using Citethisforme's citation builder.
My institution requires the brackets, but changing this behaviour in Microsoft Word means editing the Harvard style.xsl file's formatting for each and every type of reference, which would be very laborious.
Might it still be correct to format it without the brackets? Is without the brackets more common, and this is why Microsoft Word has chosen this format?

As far as I know, the term Harvard referencing is usually a synonym for the author–date parenthetical referencing in general, similar to how Vancouver refer to numerical style of reference. I am not aware of an authoritative manual for Harvard style that is analogous to Chicago or APA. It is possible that different organisations use the term Harvard for their own author–date styles.
Different author–date styles differs on how citations and the reference list are formatted. For example, according to the Chicago Manual of Style, the reference entry for a book look like this:

Lastname, Firstname, and Lastname, Firstname. 2020. Title of book. Place: Publisher.

while in the 7th edition of APA it looks like this:

Lastname, I., & Lastname, I. (2020). Title of the book. Publisher.

These two are perhaps the better known author–date styles, but there are many different variations used by different publications or organisations. The Zotero Style Repository currently lists over 4,000 different author–date styles. (Maybe your institution style is already listed there.)
If you are required to precisely follow your university style, then the only "correct" format is what the style prescribes. (For a university coursework, many instructors might be satisfied with a close approximation. You might want to check whether the (possibly 6th edition) APA format suffices for your need; it should be included in any reference generation tools.)


How to properly include research papers that are still not published in a curriculum vitae? I'm currently working on two research papers that I will send in a month to a peer-review journal, but I need to write my CV right now to apply for a job.
In my CV there are currently three sections:

Refereed Journal Articles
Refereed Conference Papers
Other scientific publication [where I've included some non-refereed publications]

In your opinion, what is the best title for a section about the two papers I'm currently working on, which are going to be submitted to peer-review journals soon, but are currently in progress?

Work in Progress is good and it  is good to have such a section.
You can also annotate each paper title with the expected time to (or of) submission. "Submission expected in December 2020", for example.


Why a certain period of time is needed for promotion of qualified applicants? The main criteria for academic promotion to associate/full professor includes, research projects, publications, grants, administrative services, and such things. These are achievements that one can obtain regardless of timeframe. Logically, one with required achievements must be able to be promoted. However, most of universities need a certain period of time before promotion application (usually 5 years).

Why one must wait for promotion, when he is already qualified?

One who is associate professor for two years but qualified for full professorship must wait another 3 years to send application for promotion. Strangely, if that person apply for a full professor position in other university, he will be appointed as a full professor (if qualified) without waiting for another 3 years.

NOTE: the only criterion which seems to need time is teaching, but I think a strong/outstanding teaching records for different courses over 2 years is comparable with teaching the exact same courses over 5 years.

From my experience and what I have observed, the time frame is time for the academic to "earn their stripes", so to speak.

Some more factors that I have noticed that are considered, that do take some time to notice, namely:

The person's character - how well do they work with colleagues and/or students.
How the person performs under pressure and during 'down' times.
How much initiative the academic shows can only be observed over a period of time.

note: the above is not usually formally documented, but are important in any profession for someone going for promotion.

Also, as the university will be making a considerable investment in the academic, it would seem that they would like to see that the academic is willing to make a considerable investment (time, expertise etc) in return.


Supervisor does not give a research project I am a graduate student in pure Mathematics. My supervisor gave me an idea to work on, and in 6-9 months I found enough stuff to write 3 papers. After I did that, I was eager to work on some new idea, but my advisor only gave me learning projects, so that I just read many papers without doing any sort of research. After 6 months, I would like to start a research project, but all this reading didn't really help me in finding one (of course I thought about questions on my own, but since the area is quite old and competitive, I was not able to find a reasonable question that was not already answered). My advisor still does not give me anything concrete to work on, but merely suggests to read this or that paper. All of this is very weird, because his other students are treated very differently, they all have projects that started from ideas of the supervisor, and some of them even publish with him!

I am quite desperate, because I get really anxious about wasting my limited time, and I would like to know what you think about this.

Now that you've written three papers, you've shown you can solve problems. But you still need to learn the other important side of research: coming up with problems to solve. We can't know your advisor's motives with certainty, but I would guess he expects you to spread your wings and become more independent. Instead of asking him for projects, I suggest coming to him with project ideas of your own, and asking what he thinks.


Is an invitation to 'chat' about a potential PhD position actually an interview? What am I to expect? I've been invited for a chat for a potential PhD position by a professor I'm interested in working with. He also wants me to give a short presentation on some experiments I've done in the past that I'm proud of. What am I supposed to expect from this? Is it going to be a real interview? My master's dissertation has essentially been on a similar field of study. Am I supposed to explain everything from the basics in the presentation or just talk about the experiments that he asked for and assume the professor knows/understands stuff? What am I going to be judged on? What are the right questions for me to ask?

Yes, this is an interview. Or at least a part of an interview - depending on your location, there may be a more formal one later. As a rule of thumb, both for academia and industry, whenever you meet with a prospective employer, be it for a coffee or lunch, a "chat" or something else, it is part of the interview.
As for the chat itself. If he asked you to give a short presentation, you should prepare to give a rather thorough one; ie. be prepared to explain basic stuff as well. If you have no idea about the format (time, place, equipment, audience (eg. is it just him?)), ask him. In my field it would be common to prepare some slides for such a presentation, but for others you would do without. It is always nice to know roughly how long time you have when preparing. Important: If the prof. says that you have, say, 20 minutes, then prepare to stick to that.
You can ask about details of the research, what is expected of PhD students wrt. teaching, possibilities for traveling and other things you are curious about.


Is graduating early from college or transferring to another college fine if I took all the upper level courses? I'm currently a sophomore at a small liberal arts college. I want to get into one of physics PhD programs with faculties renowned for quantum gravity. I'm majoring in math and physics, and since both departments in my college are small, I will have taken all the upper-level courses in math and physics until the next semester. My major GPA in physics is 4.0, and my GRE physics score is 990, but I will have no math or physics course to take after the next semester. There aren't much research opportunities here. The only research opportunity is available during summer (which is experimental physics, but I'm mainly interested in hep-th). All REUs are not available for international students. (However, there are a few programs available for int'l students, such as Caltech SURF.)

Which of the following choices would be the best?

Graduating early (3 yrs), going to physics PhD program, and saving $>60k. If I don't get into programs of my choice, I will either stay in the college, in the program until the end, or (hopefully) transferring to them after getting non-terminal Master's degree if I will have a compelling reason.
Transferring to a high ranked research university for advanced/grad-level physics courses and for more research opportunities
Staying for 4 yrs in the current institution

Only in exceptional situations should an undergraduate consider "getting out early" from their undergraduate education to pursue graduate study.  Your situation is rather exceptional and is one of the better cases for doing this that I have seen.

My honest assessment is that you sound like an outstanding student who didn't make the best choice of undergraduate institution.  Liberal arts colleges can be great for a wide range of clientele, but someone who maxed out the subject exam in their intended field of graduate study in their freshman year is probably not in that range.  If you know you want to go to graduate school in physics, you want to be taking physics courses over the next three years: independent study is okay, but it is probably not good enough.

I recommend that you apply both to PhD programs in physics and to undergraduate programs at top tier research universities.  For the latter, you are looking for more than just being able to transfer in: you want substantial scholarship opportunities (I would aim for a "full ride") and specific access to faculty and their research.

It is of course likely that you will get admitted to better undergraduate programs than PhD programs.  In my opinion if you get into an absolutely top undergraduate program with a substantial scholarship, then that's the way to go. Most of the students who are at the very top PhD programs started out their undergraduate career with a roughly similar trajectory to yours and then built on that substantially through four years of a superb undergraduate program.  I  would be a bit surprised if you got admitted to one of the top ten programs without an undergraduate degree.

If I may throw out one specific option: the college at the University of Chicago is a lovely opportunity to get a liberal arts education in the midst of an absolutely world class research university.  You can read Plato and Kant and Dostoevsky while taking graduate courses to your heart's content.  Moreover they have full ride scholarships available for exceptional students.  (I went to the University of Chicago on a full ride scholarship, read all of the above authors, took many graduate courses in my subject of interest -- mathematics -- and then got into all the graduate programs to which I applied, including the top three.  I am more satisfied with my education at the UofC and my decision to go there than almost anything else in my life.  Seriously.)


Etiquette for returning to do research as grad student in same field as undergrad lab in same institution I'm a medical student planning on taking a year off in the middle to do research. I'm currently at the same intitution as when I was an undergrad (~4 yrs ago) and want to do research in roughly the same area. I did a decent amount of research as an undergrad, all in a single lab. The research area I'm interested in is pretty small and everyone knows each other, regularly does joint journal clubs, etc.

Question: Does it matter if I reach out to the same lab I used to work in? Would it be weird if I did? Would it be rude/inappropriate if I didn't? If I do reach out to a different lab, would it be expected that I ping my old adviser to say I'm back working in research, anyway (so I don't surprise them when I run into them randomly)? Or does none of this matter very much?

I guess I'm just ignorant about the etiquette surrounding stuff like this and was hoping for some clarification. To be clear, I had no problems with my previous lab--I had a good experience and liked my old adviser.

Absolutely not rude or inappropriate, I'm a bit puzzled where you got the suggestion that it might be. There is also nothing wrong with going to a different group. You can certainly let your previous advisor know, and they would be a good reference for you who can speak about your research ability to other professors you are interested in working with, but you don't have any obligation to that professor to only ever work for them.

However, is it normal for people in medical school in your area to take a year off to do research? That part seems a bit more of a potential issue to me. Certainly there are joint research/medical programs (e.g. an MD/PhD in the US), but they typically involve much more than 1 year of research. If this is not a problem where you are, though, then there is nothing wrong with going back to a lab you have positive experience with.

One other thing to consider is whether you could gain some additional breadth of experience in another lab, but this is more about your future goals rather than an issue of what is "appropriate."


What is the difference between a "research plan" and a "research proposal"? Online sources often use "research plan" and "research proposal" interchangeably.

Two months after getting accepted into a PhD program, I was asked to do a research plan.  Is this the same as doing a research proposal?

Neither a research plan nor a research proposal is a "super specific thing you need to know about".

A proposal, on any subject, generally includes things like objectives, background, potential challenges, and a vague schedule.

A plan often includes all of the above, in greater detail, as well as necessary resources, a specific schedule with milestones, and perhaps additional project specific elements (e.g. which programming languages you might use).


What's the point in waiting 6 or 12 months before allowing researchers to make their Belgium-funded article open access? Belgium recently passed a law allowing researchers to make any of their article open access if the majority of the research funding  came from Belgium public funding

Here is the law:

  Art. 29. Dans l’article XI.196 du même Code, inséré par la loi du
  19 avril 2014, il est inséré un paragraphe 2/1 rédigé comme suit:

  “§ 2/1. L’auteur d’un article scientifique issu d’une recherche
  financée pour au moins la moitié par des fonds publics conserve, même
  si, conformément à l’article XI.167, il a cédé ses droits à un éditeur d’un
  périodique ou les a placés sous une licence simple ou exclusive, le droit
  de mettre le manuscrit gratuitement à la disposition du public en libre
  accès après un délai de douze mois pour les sciences humaines et
  sociales et six mois pour les autres sciences, après la première
  publication, dans un périodique, moyennant mention de la source de la
  première publication.

  Le contrat d’édition peut prévoir un délai plus court que celui fixé à
  l’alinéa 1er.

  Le Roi peut prolonger le délai fixé à l’alinéa 1er.

  Il ne peut être renoncé au droit prévu à l’alinéa 1er. Ce droit est
  impératif et est d’application nonobstant le droit choisi par les parties
  dès lors qu’un point de rattachement est localisé en Belgique. Il
  s’applique également aux œuvres créées avant l’entrée en vigueur de ce
  paragraphe et non tombées dans le domaine public à ce moment.”.

Google translate:

  "§ 2/1. The author of a scientific article from a research
  financed for at least half by public funds, even
  if, in accordance with Article XI.167, he has assigned his rights to a publisher of a
  periodical or has placed them under a single or exclusive license, the right
  to make the manuscript freely available to the public for free
  access after twelve months for the humanities and social sciences
  and six months for other sciences, after the first
  publication in a periodical, subject to mentioning the source of the
  first publication.

  The publishing contract may provide for a shorter period than that set
  paragraph 1.

  The King may extend the period laid down in paragraph 1.

  The right provided for in paragraph 1 can not be waived. This right is
  imperative and applies notwithstanding the law chosen by the parties
  since a point of attachment is located in Belgium. he
  also applies to works created before the entry into force of this
  paragraph and not fallen into the public domain at that time. "

What's the point in waiting 6 or 12 months before allowing researchers to make their Belgium-funded article open access?

I think you are reading this wrong. It's not that you are not allowed to make something open access before this time span, it's that you have to after it when public money has been used. This is called Delayed Open Access (thanks to Anyon, who mentions this in a comment).

Specifically note that the journal is free to open up the paper earlier:

  The publishing contract may provide for a shorter period than that set paragraph 1.

(for instance, if you paid the open access fee). I think the most salient point is this:

  The right provided for in paragraph 1 can not be waived.

That is, you cannot sign a copyright transfer to a closed-access journal that gives them the right to not make it open access even after the closing period is over.

If you are asking why they don't require immediate open access, you are back at Najib's answer - publishing is a business, and presumably the Belgian legislation has decided that Delayed Open Access is an acceptable compromise between the publisher's interests and the public's interest in free access to scientific information.


Citations in a math blog I am an incoming math PhD student in the US. I am thinking of starting a math blog. The intended audience is myself plus maybe other math graduate students.

I am a little concerned about citations to avoid plagiarism. Of course if a theorem or proof comes from a paper, I need to cite it. What about theorems and proofs coming from textbooks. For example, say I give a definition of a group, which appears in virtually all standard textbooks in introductory algebra.

I guess the latter case will happen more frequently since my blog is mostly entry level graduate material math that you can find in many textbooks.

Questions:

If a theorem or proof comes from a textbook, can I assume that it is considered common knowledge, with respect to the targeted audience, and just state and prove the theorem?
At what point does a theorem or proof stop becoming common knowledge, maybe it only appears in some very advanced textbooks?

Blog posts don't need to have a formal bibliography, but you should always provide attribution to others work, whether it is an original piece of research, or just a textbook whose presentation you are following. In a blog post, you can do this in a conversational style: point out results you enjoyed (with links!) and textbooks you find helpful. Not only will the folks you mention appreciate this, it will be helpful to your readers who want to follow up and learn more.


Putting Semiformal "Nonpublications" on your website Is there any good reason not for me to put semiformal publications on my website?
I have all my published works under publications (well actually just in a list on my front page, but it should be apparent that they are publications.
It also has my PhD project proposal, because that is a formal document.
Contrasting this, sometime I find myself producing less formal documents.
For example, after I was given access to some expensive software under a free license, on of the parties involved in negotiating, requested that I do a "short case study, once I have preliminary results."
So I have this, a document that took me a few hours to write up, and which I think is quiet nice. Its not a formal document and is more approachable to people outside my field, than any paper I would write.
I also sometimes find myself writing some very detailed notes, perhaps a mathematical, or a metaphorical description of something i need to explain to my supervisors.
It seems a bit of a waste to let these just collect dust after just a few people have seen them. But they are not generally worthy of publication. I feel like they might be interesting to others.
I thought perhaps I could make part of my website labeled "Non-publications", and put the pdfs there.
What would the cons/risks be?
So far my main concern that I have thought is that it might make me look bad by making available, less than perfect work. Some of these may lack suitable referencing for example.
I expect the pitfalls would in someway be similar to academic blogging. But perhaps different, as a blog post is a very well-known format, and are written for the audience that reads them. Where as I'm talking about documents that are presented without context. Google will still find them. Google scholar will (based on past experience) find them and attempt to affiliate them to me.

I see very little danger in putting those documents onto your website, and indeed I encourage my students to upload everything they produce and that may be of any value. My line of thinking is that we are after all paid by taxpayer money, so it seems only fair to make as much of what we do available in some way if possible.

Of course, the elephant in the room is how those "others interested in this work" will actually find your notes if you just upload them to your website as PDFs ...

  What would the cons/risks be?
  So far my main concern that I have thought is that it might make me look bad by making available, less than perfect work. Some of these may lack suitable referencing for example.

I do not think that there is a real danger in "looking bad" as long as it is clear that whatever you upload there is just quick, informal work (and, of course, as long as the work does not contain, e.g., hate speech, but I guess this goes without saying). Lacking suitable referencing may be a more real problem, and I would likely put in the few extra minutes to add appropriate attributions for every text that I put online somewhere. However, even if you decide not to do this, it is very unlikely that somebody down the road would get agitated over not being properly cited in a document called "Some Informal Notes on [A]". The key here is that you make clear that this is not a preprint of a paper or even a technical report in the traditional sense, but "only" an informal note. Hence, it should be clear that the content isn't meant as a scientific publication. This should alleviate most concerns that you are passing off other's work as your own.


How should we evaluate our peers? This is a quite broad question, to which I have some personal answers, but I think I need more different perspectives.

I am not talking about evaluating a peer's submitted work as a referee, but about evaluating applications ranging from small grants or sabbaticals (which have to be applied to at least in France) to tenure or tenure-track hiring. Such decisions have a small or huge impact on both others career and the overall academic system (by giving certain incentives), and should thus be taken very seriously. On the other hand, the time we are able to use for such evaluations is limited.

  How should we deal with this opposing constraints (evaluation is serious matter but time is limited)? What tools and proxys should we use or avoid in the evaluation process?

I am not asking about how the system should be (I know my answer: more automatic funding, sabbaticals and pay raises to have less evaluations made more thoroughly), but about what one wanting to take evaluation seriously (as opposed to a formal game that only needs an arbitrary answer) can do in the current system. Actions that might imply change in the system are welcome, as far as they can be implemented individually and the plausible outcome is considered rather than the ideal outcome if everyone did the same thing.

Edit in view of comments

Clarification about "the system": if needed please precise in your answer the relevant bits of information about the evaluation system you are speaking about, as of course things evolve and vary from place to place -- but the broad principles should be applicable regardless of the fine details so please keep this as concise as is relevant.

Example of subquestions: it has often been said that impact factor, or more generally the glamor of journal titles should not be used for evaluation. Is there a consensus about this? I don't know. They are used in practice, but are there good alternatives? Are there specific evaluation circumstances when one should use this proxy?

What about h-index and other citation metrics? When should they and should they not be evaluated?

The question is not so much about how much time one should spend (which is more or less a given), but how to achieve a reasonable result in that time. Also, what to do in a situation where one feels a reasonable result cannot be achieved?

I'm only going to answer the first part of this question:

  How should we deal with this opposing constraints (evaluation is serious matter but time is limited)?

It is true that it is often rather time consuming to do these evaluations. But I think ultimately, you need to apply the categorical imperative. In other words, you need to spend as much time and diligence on evaluations as you would expect your evaluators to spend on yours.

For a two-page application for a sabbatical, this may not be very much. But for someone applying for tenure, surely a thorough reading of at least the most important papers, along with some research about the impact of the candidate's work, is appropriate. This is thankless work, as you don't usually get a lot of credit for it. But it is nevertheless something that can't be taken lightly because of its outsize effect on the candidate and the importance of your evaluation. Consequently, if the case is not completely straightforward, if you find that you need to spend a couple of days on it, then that is what you need to do -- because you would your evaluators to do the same.


Is it a good idea to send multiple GRE scores? I have two GRE scores. The first one is V149+Q169+AW4 and the second one is V159+Q170+AW3.5. I'm applying for MSCS programs in some top universities. I've heard that admission officers don't care about AW scores, but some others said AW is more important than the verbal section (even for mscs programs). I will definitely send my second score but should I also send the first one to compensate my 3.5 AW in the second time? Some universities have the policy to accept the highest scores from each section. But I'm also worried that my 149 verbal score in the first time will hurt me if I send both.
Please help. Any advice is appreciated!

I doubt that sending the second one would make any difference. The ETS seems to consider a 3.5 and a 4.0 on the AW test as nearly equivalent.
https://www.ets.org/gre/revised_general/prepare/analytical_writing/score_level_descriptions/
Assuming this is the US, the GRE scores are only a small part of any decision in any case.
At the moment, also, coronavirus is making the GRE both less useful and less used.


Offering of a grad class rescinded for incomprehensible reason A course came up that I was interested in (C*algebras). It's a grad class but was offered to a select group of undergrads including myself. I accepted the offer but then once the class started I received an email saying the following:

"Dear XXX,

I have just noticed that you have not completed Math 311. I think it would be a terrible idea for you to be doing the operator algebra course before completing that. It would also be irresponsible of me to let you do it. This isn't really dependent on why you didn't complete the course. The appearance alone would make me look bad.

Best, XXX"

I replied that I have 100% on all but one assignment and an A+ on the midterm. I haven't yet taken the final but it will be scheduled by the end of the semester. (I couldn't take the exam for health reasons that he knows of.)

He knows I am an A+ student and has given me 2 A+'s in the 2 classes I have taken with him. I tried speaking with the instructor of the Math 311 course and asked him to speak with said prof to see if he could convince him that I know the material but I'm not sure how that will go.

I don't know why this prof would rescind the invitation when we seemed to have previously had a good rapport. The prof does know that this would be my 6th class for the term which may be a contributing factor. (4th at 4th year or above)

Is there anything else I can do to increase my chance of getting into this class?

Also I don't want to damage my relationship with this prof further as I hoped to ask them to do a summer research project.

Look, the thing with these kinds of questions is that process varies significantly from institution to institution based on their regulations, bylaws, etc.  I actually agree with the instructor's decision, even though the email is unprofessional.  It is usually not allowed for a student to take a course in which they have not yet completed the prerequisite for that course.

Having said this, there may be a solution.  In many institutions, exceptions like these are handled by a specific entity such as the Faculty Council, the Department Council, the Vice-Dean for Undergraduate Studies, the Vice-Dean for Graduate Studies, the Faculty Dean, etc. Since I don't know your institution, I can't begin to say which one of these would be the proper route to take, but typically a request or a petition could be sent to the responsible body, and they would then study it and make a decision based on your unique circumstances.

My advice in this situation would not be to get upset, nor to talk about how the reason was "incomprehensible" or anything along these lines.  I would say you that you should write a letter/email/petition to whomever is responsible in your faculty and ask that an exception can be made based on the circumstances and situation that you pointed out in your question.  Talking with the instructor of the Math 311 course probably won't help because technically, the professor of the Grad course is simply following proper university procedures and guidelines. if you are close with the instructor of the Grad course that you want to take and are familiar with him, I would say that you should talk to him in person, and ask him about what the official channels would be for getting this exception and see if he would support you in this.

Don't attack. Don't accuse. Don't get upset. Just try to find out the solution that complies with all relevant bylaws and regulations.  That is my humble advice.


How/when should I ask my supervisors' for a reference letter? I'm currently a fourth year undergraduate student graduating this year. I'm taking the upcoming school year off to travel, so instead of applying to grad school during my fourth year like most students, I will be applying this upcoming September (when I will have graduated).

I worked with two professors this school year doing research, one of which I got a publication out of. I plan on asking both for reference letters for my graduate school applications.

Both profs seem to like me and are happy with my work. However, I won't be actually applying to grad school until late this year (probably September-December), so I'm worried if I ask for a reference later in the year, they will have forgotten a significant chunk of their experience supervising me and my contributions.

I want to get a letter out of them now when I'm still fresh in their minds and can get a great recommendation out of them. I'm sure they'll give me a positive one either way, but I feel like if I get one now it'll be a lot stronger, where as if I do it several months in the future, considering how busy they are, I probably won't be nearly as well remembered and my letter will be a lot more generic.

I wasn't sure if this is appropriate to do, and how I should go about doing this, so I was hoping I could get some advice on this. Both profs work in ECE (electrical and computer engineering) and the programs I will be applying to will be a combination of ECE programs and computer science programs.

Inform them about your plans now and let them decide what works best for them.

You may be right that they will have forgotten you by the time you apply (depending on how much you worked together). But on the other side, the best LORs are specific to a position you are applying for and should be tailor written, "generic" LORs may not be as good, and some people may not want to write one without knowing what they are going to be for.


How to Present an (Essentially) The Same Proof, in a Different, Earlier Working Paper, in a Present Paper? I was requested to provide a simple proof for a side assertion made in one of my submissions. Regarding feasibility, it can be done; but the simplest proof that I came up with is already present in another
earlier submission under review, and hence, to avoid "self-repetition", I did not give the simplest possible proof in the present one. The situation could be easier if I have the older one time-labeled.

What is a wise way out given the situation? Thanks.

Presumably you cited the earlier work. If so, I don't really understand the concern. But, if the editor/reviewer/conference would accept it, you could offer to show them the proof separately from your new paper. This would permit them to verify the result if they think it necessary.

But you were correct in not including the result in the new paper. But that also assumes that the earlier paper will actually be published. And it is possible that it won't be.

However, there is an alternative, but it would also require some editor assistance. For purpose of review, you could include the proof but note that it would need to be replaced by a citation if the earlier paper gets accepted. The final, published, version would be a bit different from what was reviewed, but that is normally the case anyway. The easy way to include the proof would be in an appendix.