How does the American PhD system works for foreign students? I'm a MSc Theoretical Physics student from Italy, and I'll most likely graduate around the end of next year: for the Italian academic system, this means that I'll be ready to try to get into a PhD program (after 3 years of BSc and 2 of MSc).
I'm considering other countries' universities too, and since I spent a year of High School in the US I was looking for information about it. For what I understood, their post-secondary education system is college (4 years) for a BSc, then either Master or PhD (? years). Is this understanding correct? If so, do they have special rules for foreign students who already have a BSc and a MSc?

In most fields, US PhDs can start right after a bachelor's degree. Some incoming US students will have masters degrees, either because they've been uncertain about their career path and or because they pursue a masters to get more experience to make their applications look better (especially if their undergraduate research experience is lacking).
Because US PhDs usually start right after a BS/BA, they are typically longer than the European variety; 5 years is common, though for some fields they can be much longer, up to 10 years.
Coming in with a European masters (or a US masters, for that matter), there is not typically anything that will allow you to complete the US PhD faster than normal. There might be cases where you can skip some coursework, but that will be handled on a case-by-case basis.
Funding can sometimes be more difficult for foreign students unless their own government provides support, since some funding sources are not available to international students (especially fellowships from the US government). Other funding is available to all (most TAs, sometimes with a more strict language requirement, many RAs and PAs; check with programs you want to apply to about their funding availability).
Many programs and universities will have information for potential incoming international graduate students, you should search the websites for individual schools/programs you are interested in. Some of this additional information will cover things like visa requirements (including funding) and language proficiency. An example from my own institution is here: https://grad.wisc.edu/international-students/
As far as PhDs as a job, I'm less familiar with Italy but have seen the German system explained often here: US PhDs are not jobs like German ones are. That said, almost all US PhD students (and especially in STEM) have some sort of funded position that includes a stipend, and typically this comes with tuition remission, so you take home a (modest) income to pay expenses, while not paying tuition. Other students are on fellowships or traineeships that specifically fund a students' education and include a stipend.
For some fields, these are usually Research Assistant positions, where you work on a research project for pay (sometimes this is the same as your PhD thesis, sometimes not - again, depends on field and circumstance), or Teaching Assistant positions, where you teach or help teach a course or two. Programs typically guarantee some sort of funding for X years; if you take longer, you could possibly find yourself without funding (the likelihood of this depends on the field; I don't know about theoretical physics but my educated guess would be that there are enough TA positions in physics that as long as you're willing to teach you'd find a TA spot). There are also cases where someone might do an unfunded/self-funded PhD - unless you (or your family) are independently wealthy I would strongly advise against this (you will find other Q&A here about it).


Is it ethical to give a final exam after the professor has quit before teaching the remaining chapters of the course? I am enrolled in a lpn nursing program, and the professor teaching the pharmacology course announced to the class last week that he wont be here the following week, due to a "conference in California", and that another teacher would come and teach us the remaining chapters for the final exam.

Today no one showed up to teach the class, and the director is now claiming she had no idea he wasn't going to be here to finish the course. The director told us to read the rest of the chapters on our own before Wednesday (basically teach ourselves 6 chapters worth of pharmacology)... oh and there is also a HESI examination that they are saying we still have to take on Wednesday even though we haven't covered all of the material. I feel like the school is setting everyone up to fail at this point so we have to pay 3,000 to take the course again. I really need to know if this is ethical??

Remember Hanlon’s Razor: "Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity."

I doubt that any of the staff at the university are deliberately trying to make you fail so that they can make more money by forcing you to redo the course; it’s much more likely that someone just put things off, failed to read their emails, or something similar because they were busy with other things.

Complain to the student ombudsman at your university if you feel like a failure by the staff to properly follow procedures has disadvantaged you.


How would one fail a master thesis defense? So I have to defend my master thesis in computer science in two weeks. It's in Germany and the thesis is 30 credits. I'm wondering what could make someone fail his defense? In my thesis I mainly compare different approaches and algorithms and did experiments on them to answer some research questions. Would I fail if, for example, during the discussion a mistake in my comparison and evaluation approach is discovered which makes my results meaningless? Although I discussed my approach and everything I did with my advisor (postdoc not the prof), yet I still fear that I might have done something wrong and then everything collaps.

I still remember reading a question on this site where someone mentioned that he discovered a vital mistake in his PhD thesis after two years of the defense which made almost his entire thesis useless. Yet of course he didn't lose his PhD degree. So if something like this happens, but during the defense, what could happen?

So how would one fail his master thesis defense? Just to calm down a bit and feel safe and secure!

Edit: I passed with an excellent grade :D.

Would I fail if, for example, during the discussion a mistake in my comparison and evaluation approach is discovered which makes my results meaningless? Although I discussed my approach and everything I did with my advisor (postdoc not the prof), yet I still fear that I might have done something wrong and then everything collaps.

This should not happen unless:

The mistake is blatantly obvious and something you should have really known better. And with blatantly obvious, I mean something that somebody who has not even studied computer science or a related field could easily spot. Even then you may have chances, if the rest of your work is appropriate – almost everybody brainfarts now and then.
You made not only one mistake but a lot of big mistakes.
It becomes obvious that you deliberately ignored that mistake, to avoid being stuck or to get “nicer” results.

(In the first two cases, your advisor is in big trouble, too.) The point of the master thesis is that you should demonstrate that you can investigate a scientific question under supervision (or something similar – check the regulations, if you wish to know). One mistake does not change this.

Moreover, in some examination regulations I am aware of, there is a procedure for the case that some important but localised flaw is detected in your thesis. For example, you could be given a month to amend your thesis.

  How would one fail a master thesis defense?

I have not experienced or heard of such a case but from what I have gathered, you pass if you:

Give a talk about your thesis.
Be able to answer questions about it.
Are not detected to have been cheating.

Even if you suffer from a mental breakdown due to nervousness or similar, you probably can repeat the defense – at least with any reasonable examination regulation and examination committee. I am aware of one case where somebody had a nervous breakdown for understandable reasons¹ and the examination board let him repeat the exam. If you look into your examination regulations, there are probably some clauses that allow the examination board to do some things at their own discretion in exceptional cases.

Be aware though that being very difficult to fail does not make the defense unimportant. A bad defense may seriously (and in particular more than nominally) affect your thesis degree, which in turn has a huge impact on your total degree. In particular having passed a thesis with the lowest possible degree (or something close to it) is something you definetely do not want to have in your vita².

¹ It’s very complicated, but you might compare it to the following: In the middle of the defense, somebody who was the defender’s girlfriend until six months ago enters the room being obviously pregnant in her ninth month.
² Unless you are in one of those few disciplines where this is the norm.


Should accomplishments be included in a CV? If so, how? I imagine most academics have done a number of unique things that are noteworthy, but might not clearly fit into the standard CV categories. Such things might include:

Being featured in a high-profile documentary about one's research
Discovering asteroids or exoplanets
Significant contributions to open-source software
Designing/maintaining a public-outreach website
???

Should these be featured in a "Miscellaneous" category, or somehow massaged into an existing category? Or, should they be omitted entirely? (If something should be omitted, what is the criteria for keeping/omitting it?)

Actually, I wouldn't worry too much about "categories" on you CV. Create new ones as needed. But yes, you should include such things - especially if they have been recognized by others. The bullets you give seem reasonable for inclusion. Perhaps the ones most related to your work should be higher up the list as should the more significant ones.

You can say only a little or a lot, depending on the significance, of course. Some that you just mention might open discussions in any interviews.

In general, if you think it is something good you have done, then list it. No one will know otherwise.


Are there any negative consequences to an instructor attempting to achieve "all A's from everyone"? Instructors can use reflective teaching to analyze their teaching, in the hope that they can improve their course for subsequent terms. If a teacher focused on insuring that all students earned A's, would that bring about unintended negative consequences.

Here are some examples:

If some students did not earn an A because they failed to understand some material, the teacher would attempt try harder in the next term to explain this material more clearly and to also identify or correct the course readings.
If some students did not earn an A because they were uninterested and unmotivated, the teacher should try harder to make the lessons more interesting.

Assume that students only earn an A by demonstrating that they have achieved the course goals, the teacher never lowers their standards for what is an A, and students not made aware of this goal, would such an "all A's from everyone" focus create any intended problems?

No, there are no negative consequences.
The key is this sentence right here:

Assume that students only earn an A by demonstrating that they have
achieved the course goals

That being the case, grading becomes evaluating the following:

If everyone in the class is able to do everything that they should be able to do... mission accomplished

Edit: I teach pilots how to land airplanes safely.  Students only earn an A by demonstrating that they have achieved course goals (they land the plane), and I never lower my standards for anyone (you don't get an A unless you land safely).  As for the third criteria, I don't make students explicitly aware of my goal, but let's face it, it's implicit in the training.
My argument comes from seven years of personal experience:

Are there any negative consequences of me making sure that all my students are able to land the plane safely?  No.
Are there any negative consequences of me not making sure that all of my students are able to land the plane safely?  Yes: flame and then newspaper headlines.


What do I need to include in a tenure-track assistant professor job application cover letter? I am currently applying for tenure-track assistant professor jobs.
One of the positions requires me to submit a cover letter,
in addition to a CV, research statement, and teaching statement.
(The application is online)
I am thinking of writing the following:

  October 1, 2014

  Dear faculty committee

  I wish to apply for the faculty position
  in the Department of Mathematics
  at Stanford University.
  Currently, I am a postdoctoral fellow at
  the University of California at Berkeley
  in the Department of Mathematics
  under the supervision of Dr. James Moriarty.

  Enclosed are my curriculum vitae, teaching and research statements,
  and two research papers.
  Please do not hesitate to contact me if further information is needed.

  Yours truly,
  John Watson
  Department of Mathematics
  University of California at Berkeley
  123 4th Street, Box 5678
  Berkeley, CA 12345-6789
  (123) 456-7890

What is the purpose of the cover letter?
Is it just to indicate what are the documents included in the application?
I ask this because most of the other positions for which I am applying
don't require a cover letter.
Should I include a brief summary of my research interests and teaching experience, one paragraph each, in the cover letter?

Edit:
In reality, I am not in the field of mathematics,
nor am I a postdoctoral fellow at Berkeley.
The details in my cover letter are fictitious
and meant only to illustrate the structure of the cover letter
which I will write.

I'll be honest about when I read packages (in chemistry). The first thing I look at is the CV. I also skim the cover letter. Then I read the recommendation letters and the research and teaching statements. Depending on the CV and recommendation letters, I may take more or less time on the research/teaching statements - if the candidate seems promising, I'm more thorough.

But if the cover letter is short, not tailored at least some to our department, contains obvious typos, etc. I'll get a bad impression.

Look, anyone applying to a tenure-track position has taken a lot of time to get to this point. You've secured a PhD, possibly gone through a postdoc position, and prepared the whole application.

Why spoil it with a lousy cover letter. Take some time, think up a paragraph or two about a particular department, consider what you might add, and let us know.

This tells me that the candidate is not just blindly sending out a gazillion applications.

I doubt everyone completely rewrites their cover letters for each application (I didn't). But I do want to see that someone has taken the time to carefully craft a paragraph or three about us and how they might fit.

Will we interview someone who seems stellar with a poor cover letter? Probably. But we also get ~100 applications for every opening, so why would you risk it?


type of experience required for masters I graduated from university last year with a bachelors degree in Mechatronics Engineering. Good learning and GPA is quite good. I have planned to do a Masters degree from the US next fall with a focus on data science (I am very much interested in learning all of computer vision, data visualization, machine learning and using these to solve practical problems eventually - I have made some projects related to these in my undergraduate as well). Unfortunately, where I live in the third world, there are barely any work opportunities in this field and most which exist require years of experience and/or a PhD.

I have been working in a Fortune 500 company as a service engineer for the past 4 months. It's a bit stressful and the job feels quite menial because while there is quite a bit of work to handle, it's simple (replacing parts if a machine breaks down, sending emails, etc) and in terms of actual learning there isn't much. My manager told me this as well. I only get time to research and work on my personal projects after work. But because I have to travel and work overtime quite often, I tend to "miss" a few days which ruins my flow of learning. Case in point is when I was about 25% of the way through a machine learning book but then later hadn't touched in the past 2 weeks because of excess work. So I have to start all over again.

So recently I was thinking to quit and work an easier job I've been offered (which again is not too related to the field I want to get into, but nevertheless a job is a job) that gives me more free time. I even considered the option of not working at all and taking several MOOCs (I feel like there is a lot of good material there), learning as much as possible related to the field of study I want to pursue for the year I am still here. For the record, money is not an issue for me, although not working an actual job at all feels very degenerate and does look bad on the CV.

So my question is: what do the universities really want to see and what would help my chances of getting admission? Corporate experience? Should I sacrifice my "good" Fortune 500 job for an easier one to work more on my personal projects / research? Will this help more because I can mention more things related to my field of study in my SOP? For example I want to further improve some of the things I've made in undergrad but it's hard to find the time to do that with the job I'm currently doing.

Advice would greatly be appreciated. Please let me know if I have been vague anywhere as well.

My suggestion is that you continue your job as Master's programs in engineering departments in the US (at least for many schools) value the experience in the industry before taking on a Master's degree. As for personal projects, it is always useful to be able to present a few in your application materials; however, don't feel like you have to learn everything about computer vision, machine learning etc. before you apply for the schools. It is what the degree is for.

Having done some amount of work is surely useful, as it shows your genuine interest in the field and being able to effectively articulate why you want to study a certain field in your application statement also carries some considerable weight when it comes to admissions. You can try to focus on a single, but a considerably impressive project on a related topic and present it in your application, rather than trying to take all the MOOCs out there (although Andrew Ng's courses are quite useful).


Changing ordering of authorship in a proceeding In the field of applied math where a paper has been accepted for a conference presentation (talk), is it common for the ordering of the authors to be changed for a proceeding that entails thereafter?

Here is a quite frequently occurring extreme case which may help you evaluate your own situation:

As @JonCuster also mentioned in their comment, there is always plenty of time between the abstract submission and the presentation itself, and the work typically evolves a lot during that period. Imagine it evolved such that new collaborators were added. Adding new names in there may change the list of authorship a lot. Imagine also that you actually submitted the manuscript by the time you present it, of course with the co-authors on it. In the conference, strictly adhering to the list of authors submitted in the abstract would mean removing your new co-authors, which should be out of question as it is best practice to give them credit as co-authors of your work. Thus, the list of authors can definitely change during the actual presentation as one is usually entitled to also present improvements to one's work. Whether it is common in your field, I don't know, but my guess would be that it is not too rare.


Change affilation in printed publication I am coauthor of publication (in Journal of archaeological science) and i want to change my Affiliation,  but publication is already printed (2014)...  Is it possible to change affilation after printing?

Is it possible to change affiliation after printing?

No, at this point it's almost certainly too late.  If the affiliation was correct at the time, then there's no problem at all; it's understood that affiliations change over time and old publications are not updated.  If there was a minor error or oversight, then there's still probably nothing you can do about it now.  You could ask the editor whether it's possible to issue an erratum, but it would have to be a remarkably serious error to justify that.  (For example, an erratum could be justified if there's an error in the affiliation that creates genuine ambiguity as to who the author is, say if the publisher accidentally confused you with someone else with a similar name and listed their affiliation instead of yours.)


Should I list my degrees chronologically, or in order of relevance in my CV? Say that I have achieved a Masters degree in Physics, then a Masters degree in Mathematics. Then for a couple of years, I focused on different fields. I have had placements related to agriculture and botany, as well as taken online courses in Machine Learning. After careful consideration I decided want to pursue a PhD in Physics and so I am preparing for applications.

Normally CV's are written in (reverse) chronological order, most recent experiences first. However, my path is not straightforward, and so I am confronted with a choice.

On the one hand, since I have been told that a CV could be glanced at in less than 10s, I would want to put the most relevant (and prestigious) elements first. On the other hand, I am required to have those degrees to simply be eligible in those courses, and to provide the relevant certificates. This makes me want to keep the CV in reverse chronological order, for the sake of clarity and simplicity.

In the motivation letter / note of research interests I can also briefly explain my path, highlight my relevant experience and thus perhaps reduce the need of highlighting it in the CV.

I would stick to the standard listing. As you say, the reader wants to spend only 10 seconds, so don't write it in a way that might confuse them. If you list a lower ranked degree before a higher ranked one, they may stop reading at what they imagine the end.

In general it probably isn't good to get too clever in lists of things. Be clever in your letter and interviews.


What is a Research Scientist position? In an advert, I read:
"[University U] is inviting applications for a multi-year fully funded Post-Doctoral Associate position. Highly qualified candidates may also be considered for a Research Scientist position."

What is a Research Scientist compare to a Post-Doctoral Associate position in an USA Academic like environment ?

Every university is different. However, my university (UT Austin) has, roughly, three research-only track positions: Research Associate, Research Scientist, and Research Professor. None of them are tenure-track or require teaching, and they all are roughly equivalent to the tenure-track positions: Assistant Professor, Associate Professor, Professor. Research Scientist has roughly the same promotion requirements as Associate Professor but only requires 3 outside letters rather than 8, and is a little lighter than the research and service requirements to the best of my knowledge. Both tracks can be proceeded by a postdoc position, but often do not. I started at UT as a Research Associate straight out of my PhD program and was later promoted to Research Scientist.

These positions are offered to give the university a place for professional researchers in non-teaching roles to work without the constraints or requirements of a teaching job. We have lots of them only mostly grant/soft money at the computing center where I work.


Master's studies in France and Greece (one year per country) plausibility This might sound a bit ridiculous, but I would love to spend a year in Greece and France and I think my master's studies might be a great time for that. However, I am not sure how plausible such an idea would be. Assuming I were to go to Greece first and apply to a French university for my second year, will I just need to ensure that the syllabus taken at the Greek university is compatible with the French one? I haven't thought through many of the details so this is the only issue that jumps out to me, are there any other problems I should be concerned with?

If your plan is to live in each country one year, you would be better off by doing a master course of 2 years in Greece (or France) and being one year exchange student with Erasmus program in France (or Greece).
As far as I know, you can be Erasmus student without scholarship (which means you will fund yourself through the abroad stay).
Bureaucracy can be complicated (transcript of exams must be translated, syllabus not matching, etcetc) but being under the umbrella of the Erasmus Programm will help you a lot.


How difficult it is to get a TT in the U.S. after leaving the country? I completed my higher ed in the U.S. (from B.A. to Ph.D.) and have been in this country for 12 years. I received a TT offer from a teaching university ( I didn't enjoy it but appreciated the opportunity), but the visa thing didn't work out. At this point, I'll have to leave the country because I'm at the end of my OPT.
I received a job offer from my home country. The university itself is an English-teaching institute with a decent teaching load, and they are pushing for research. As far as I know, my future colleagues are most foreigners  (Korean, American, German, etc.). The pay is decent as well.
Therefore, I have two questions:

is it still possible for me to get a TT position in the U.S. after leaving?
will my work experience outside the U.S. be counted/valued?

I have been interviewing at different universities, but my choices of the school were more out of desperation than what I wanted. The school that I loved most had to pause their search due to COVID, and I missed more than half of the applications because the former employer didn't inform me about the situation until March. After many hard and tearing days, I am wondering if I should take the job offer back home to continue doing what I do with much better support to do research. But I fear that I won't be back in the states after leaving here.
I'd be glad to know your experience or suggestions! Thank you in advance!

Q1. Is it possible to get a TT position in the US after leaving?
Yes, it is possible; I have done something similar (in Computer Science). I left the US to do an extended PostDoc and then returned to the US as a professor. This worked out for me in particular because I had experience and expertise in a specific area that the school was looking for. (And >40 publications by the time I returned.)
Q2. Will my work experience outside the US be counted/valued?
If you are productive there typically is no reason it won't. In particular, you need to continue to publish high quality work at top venues. This may be harder to do if you don't have good students. In this case you may look for good collaborators and do things like invite their students for research visits.


Does having developed a local (La)TeX system help in graduate admission? Suppose that a person was born in country A and the language of country A was his mother language (non-English); he then immigrates to country B (English speaking), is a citizen of country B and has done his undergraduate entirely in country B. This person had no need to typeset anything in his own native language but devoted a lot of time and developed an open-source (La)TeX system for country A; the localized (TeX)LaTeX system that he has developed is now extensively used in country A in academia for typesetting books, theses , ... . He is also a well-known person in country A for his TeX work. His TeX work for country A was very significant that improved the quality of the academic publishing in country A a lot and academics in country A can even write a letter to confirm this.

Now if this person applies for graduate school in electrical engineering (USA), does his TeX work for country A help him in his graduate admission? is there any need to mention his TeX work or will not the admission committee really care?

Note: USA is neither country A nor country B

Like all "extracurricular" activities, it will help, but maybe not as much as you would like. I agree with Jeff that it's an "accomplishment that shows a lot of desirable traits", but fundamentally, if the rest of your application is not sound, this is not going to win them over.

I think it is best to think of this as a tie-breaker - if the rest of your academic achievements are as good as the ones of the next best candidate, this is going to be an unique characteristic that will make you stand out and be more memorable. However, if other candidates have better letters, more research experience, or vastly better grades, the fact that you did something very useful in a fundamentally different area is not going to be valued highly enough.


Should I pursue a research area even after finding that papers have already been written on it? I am an undergraduate and I have no experience in research papers. I have come up with an idea  to write a simple research paper on "Emerging fiber optic networks in Africa." To my utter astonishment, I have seen a few papers already published in IEEE forum: one titled "Developing a fiber optic backbone for Africa" and another one I can't remember...

How can I deal with such a thing? Should I go and do my own research on the topic and see what happens? Or should I come up with another idea?

Papers have been written on nearly every topic you can possibly think of. I would be shocked if someone HADN'T written a paper on your potential research area by now. The trick to good research is to position your research in the space alongside other papers. What did 'Emerging fiber optic networks in Africa' conclude? What was their methodology, sample size, literature review or most importantly their conclusion? Each one of these areas can be used as a jumping point for your research to confirm, critique, dispute, refute or supplement theirs. It's good that others have come before you to beat down the path so that you can potentially tread a little further off the beaten trail. To answer your question, I personally think you should continue to pursue your research area, there is always scope to perform more research, especially in your field of interest.


Is "short paper" or "tool paper" valued less than full version paper? Some conferences provide both the regular paper track and the tool paper (sometimes called short paper) track. My question is: Is the latter category of papers generally regarded as of lower standards than the former one? What would be your first impression before you start reading a  paper that comes with "short paper" in its description or title?

An example of such regular paper vs. tool paper can be found in the recent call-for-papers of the Computer Aided Verification conference.

I'm not sure that my area of CS is 100% comparable, since "tool paper" and "short paper" don't seem synonymous to me (I haven't seen any conference use "tool paper" as an official track name, but papers about tools feature regularly in the regular track).

But in my experience, yes, short paper is generally for lower-standard work, or more preliminary work. In fact, at all the conferences I have attended recently with regular and short paper tracks, the papers in the short paper track were mainly selected from the papers submitted to the regular track that didn't make the cut. Roughly speaking, first quartile gets to be full papers, second quartile short papers, the rest gets rejected. (Percentages vary with the quality of the conference, of course. Sometimes there's also a third tier of acceptance for posters.)


Hiring an academic researcher to implement an algorithm in a paper they wrote I recently joined a technology startup company where a key business value-proposition depends on solving certain various problems that no current business competitor solves. There is one particular sub-problem we're looking to offer a commercial solution to - and it has been already solved by an academic team who published a paper describing an algorithmic solution about 15 years ago. To our knowledge, no commercial operation employs their approach. We would like to capitalize on this.

The team-members are still working at the original university and fully contactable.

The problem is the solution as described in the paper is beyond the current academic-ability of the startup's employees - and given time constraints I'm considering the possibility of contacting the team to ask them to implement it for us - as paid professionals, of course.

Is this appropriate? Is there a good way to frame this? Would paying them for their work introduce any kind of conflict-of-interest or other consequences?

It is definitely appropriate to ask.  University policies on outside work for employees vary.  But typically it is allowed.  There are at least three possible approaches to this.

You hire the academic directly, and it is a side job for them.
You provide the university with research funding, which is then used to pay to make the implementation.  This might have tax benefits, it will make the academic look good, and will allow the university to take a cut of the money.
You partner with the university to obtain funding from a third party (probably a government program).  Your company pays for the commercial part of the project and the third party provides pure research funds the academics want.  This makes everyone look good but can be slow.

The key thing here is that you need to convince the academics that there is a benefit for them to participating.  This is a matter of their personal preferences.


What is 'Persuasive Data'? I'm submitting an abstract for the World Molecular Imaging Conference and they advise:

  Please include a Persuasive Data file if you would like your abstract to be considered for an oral presentation. Persuasive data should include figure captions that explain the results of the figure without requiring the reviewer to re-read the main text.

The Persuasive data file should be .pdf or .doc

I have never come across this format before, does anyone know what a persuasive data file is? I'm guessing either extended abstract or actual experimental data?

Basically it is an infographic/data visualization which includes a graphic summary of your results, can be a chart, a graph an image etc. One must be able to view it and be exposed to the main results/conclusions.


Is having access to past exams cheating and, if yes, could it be proven just by a good grade? I studied for three weeks straight for an exam because I was really anxious to pass it with a high grade, while everyone else didn’t study much. Now the problem is, I had access to the exam from the previous year because someone gave it to me. I don’t know where this person got this exam, but I think it was made public after he completed his exam. The thing is I don’t know if I was allowed to have them or not.

Now the exam is over and I didn’t receive my grade while everyone else received it. The average grade for the exam is approximately 50%. Now my professor wants me to see him in his office about the exam, but doesn’t tell me why. The only explanation I can think of would be cheating. My guess is that I scored way higher than everyone else and now I’m kind of panicking.

It’s also important to note that on the exam, half of the questions were very similar as the one from previous year and that no material was allowed during the exam, so I could not have looked at it while doing the exam. Also, I have a high GPA, so it’s not implausible for me to have good grades.

Do you think I could get in trouble for having access to past exams even if there’s no way someone could know I had access to them? And is it really considered cheating?

UPDATE:  Thanks everyone for sharing their thoughts on the answer. I'm writing this answer to give some feedback. So I met with my professor this morning and I admitted having the exam from a previous year. I went with honesty, because I thought that it was the best way to go. The professor was happy about my honesty and he just asked me to elaborate some answer which I did. He saw that I knew my theory well and he didn't punish me further for it.

You haven't said whether you were actually accused or not. I'm assuming that you are just worried about what might happen in the meeting that hasn't happened yet.

The most honest way to proceed, though you may suffer for it, is to tell it exactly like it happened. You studied three weeks, you had access to old exam materials and used those to prepare. All you had in the exam was your memory and your skills. You had no knowledge of any question to be asked on this exam.

If the professor thinks you cheated, then s/he is very naive about how the world works. Student fraternities typically keep records of old exams and students study from them. If the professor uses old questions they should expect that those questions are available.

You might be asked for the source of the materials and you would be unwise to conceal them and might face larger issues if you try.

As the answer of Azor Ahai suggests, make sure that what you did isn't explicitly forbidden by  available course materials. But I don't really see a way in which requirements could be stated that really disallow such a practice. It would be completely unenforceable. Doing well is not a crime. Studying hard is not a crime.

If your professor disagrees and wants to punish you, I'd suggest taking it to a department head or dean, again explaining exactly what you did and how.

If you suffer for honesty, then it is deeply unfair.


Are PhD students allowed to extend their graduate studies to have a better chance at an academic job? How long is this allowed for even after the student has completed graduation requirements?

In the United States, there is a lot of opportunity for flexibility in scheduling graduation, assuming the faculty member has sufficient funding and motivation to keep the student around.

In most cases, however, the student would likely be served better not by delaying their graduation but instead by arranging for a transitional period as a postdoc with their same advisor.  In many cases, the cost of a postdoc is often not terribly different than a graduate student (higher salary is offset by lack of tuition), and there is typically little difficulty converting grant money from one to the other.

As a postdoc, however, there is no longer a question of graduation and thesis hanging over the former student's head, and they can be more free to focus instead on publication, networking, giving talks, and other things that will help to better position them for applying for academic positions.


Signaling Interest for Job at Low Ranked University How do PhD graduates signal job interest to low ranked universities? I am envisioning a scenario where a candidate does not get interviewed by a university because the university believes the candidate is "over qualified", but the candidate is actually very interested in working at that university because of some outside reason (family in the area, spouse employment, etc).
How does the candidate tell the low ranked university to consider hiring him/her, even if the candidate is overqualified? (I don't intend this to sound snobbish, I am just interested in how the process works).

I've been involved in many faculty searches over the years, and my institution and department probably meet your definition of "lower ranked."  In the searches that I've been involved in, we simply don't skip over a candidate because they're "overqualified."  Rather, we try to attract the best candidates and hope that candidates who aren't really interested in our position or who find a more attractive position will drop out of the search as early as possible.

Given the nature of the job market today, it's inevitable that many well qualified applicants who will ultimately end up at some more prestigious institution will have applied for our position.  Even the most well qualified candidates need to hedge their bets by applying for dozens of jobs.  I don't blame them for applying to our position as long as there is a reasonable chance that they would accept an offer from us.

We invite the best qualified candidates to phone interview.  During the phone interviews we do our best to make clear what the job would be like (research expectations, teaching loads, salary, benefits, location, etc.)  If a candidate is truly not interested in our position that lack of interest may be apparent during the phone interview.  Some candidates get screened out for showing such a lack of interest.   Sometimes applicants figure out during the interview (or shortly thereafter) that they're no longer interested in the job and ask to withdraw from the search.  We invite the candidates who did best in the screening interviews for full on-campus interviews.

After the on-campus interviews we're typically left with two or three candidates that we like, and then we start making offers.  It's not uncommon for our first or second choice to turn down an offer, but in practice we end up with what we consider a good candidate who is willing to take the job.

In the worst case we could always close the tenure track search, hire a visitor for the year and try again the next year.  That hasn't been necessary in my department in the last 22 years.

If you're particularly interested in a position because of some family issue, then you can make that reason clear in your cover letter.  In my experience, these personal reasons for applying for a job seldom end up being the factor that makes a candidate decide to accept an offer.  From my point of view as a search committee member, I try to avoid using such factors in making my decisions.


How to manage relationship with post-doc supervisor when applying for a tenure-track position one year before post-doc ends? I currently hold a post-doctoral position in the UK, which is 3 years long, and I am in my second year. I am wondering how bad would it look for my employer if I apply for a lectureship post that I just saw announced and caught my interest? They ask for my current employer as a reference, so there is a slight chance they will contact them.

I am not sure how it would look, considering that I supposedly signed up for a 3 years job, and would be leaving a year earlier. I don't want them to think that I don't like my current place or anything like that. If I do get that other job, it wouldn't be too terrible even if they don't like it. But there is also a great chance that I won't get the job and will stay in my current position for another year.

EDIT: this is my second post-doc position.

In my experience supervising post-docs the goal has been to get the post-doc into a tenure-track position.  I've seen post-docs apply for tenure track positions and get them before the end of our funding for the post-doc, and I've considered that to be a success, even though we had go out and find a replacement for the post-doc.

I would encourage you to discuss this with your current supervisor.  If they're not supportive then you probably won't get the kind of recommendation you would need, and there might not be any point in applying for the position.  If they are supportive then you can apply with some confidence.  Even if you don't get the job, you'll have some experience with the application (and perhaps interview) process.


How to handle plagiarism on method that does not affect outcome results when reviewing a paper? I was reviewing a paper related to my field (computational fluid dynamics) a while ago and, while reading a part of the methodology section where the numerical scheme and the equations were explained, I had a weird sense of déjà-vu. Regretfully, I found out that the author had plagiarized about three to four paragraph from a paper published two years ago. What was even crazier is that the author had plagiarized me, since the paragraph he had copied were from a paper I actually had previously published, thus explaining the feeling of déjà-vu.

I obviously noted that in my review and in my message to the editor, but I did not reject the paper directly. I acted this way since it was in the methodology section and related to mathematical formulas and really did not affect the outcome of the result. Was I in the wrong? Should such small plagiarism warrant instant rejection or is it sufficient to point them out and let the editor deal with that?

There is no such thing as unimportant plagiarism.  And three to four stolen paragraphs is not small.

You did the right thing to report it to the editor.  But I also would have rejected the paper.  There is no place in academia for academic misconduct.  It certainly shouldn't be published.


MPhils or Masters by Research in Germany in a mathematical subject I was wondering whether there are Masters by Research or MPhils in Germany in a mathematical subject? I have been advised to look at the 3 Berlin universities (TU, HU, FU) but have only found PhD's and MSc's. What is the equivalent of a research masters in Germany? Thanks!

Most master’s degrees in Germany require a thesis in some form, usually comprising the final semester of studies. However, because of the Bologna process, there are unlikely to be “pure research” programs.


Which term is correct for a work submitted for a master's degree: paper, thesis or dissertation? What is the difference among the terms paper, thesis and dissertation?  Which one should I use, for instance if I am completing a master's degree? Are they interchangeable ?

A paper usually refers to a published article but can also mean a shorter written essay, for example as in term-paper. The thesis and dissertation is basically equivalent, at least in its use. Originally a thesis is more than the written work, it is the thought or thinking coupled to the problem as the original meaning of the word indicates. From this perspective the word dissertation is used for the written work that comes out of your degree work.

So for a master degree, you will see masters thesis and masters dissertation used interchangeably. I would suggest checking what is used in your department or university and use whatever is customary.


What does it mean if the status of manuscript changed directly from "editor assigned" to "reviews completed"? I submitted a manuscript to a journal a month ago but the status was changed to "reviews completed" after "editor assigned," with nothing in between. What does that mean?

It means that the reviewers have completed their work and submitted their reviews. The editor will now make a decision based on her judgment as well as the opinions of the reviewers, and you should expect to hear back from the journal shortly.


Advice - MS in mathematics to increase competitiveness for PhD programs? I am a senior maths major (computer science minor) who is pretty worried about the next step in my academic career. First, let me state that I'm about as sure as I can be that I want to get a PhD in mathematics. Unfortunately, I didn't realize what the field entailed, or my passion for it, until I had made many really poor decisions - mostly in the form of bad attendance. For example, I basically just showed up for tests in calc 2, 3, linear algebra, and differential equations, and consequently, my field of potential letters of recommendation is quite small. To make things worse, I come from a party school - I need letters!

I've had one professor (abstract algebra) offer to write me a letter, and I've taken my advanced calc sequence under a professor who I think could write me a good recommendation (adv calc 2 was a graduate course; had [i think] the highest grade out of about 15 students). I'm also taking topology (graduate level) this semester, and am hoping to impress my way to a third letter.

My GPA is okay - cumulative about 3.61; math is all A's and one C in linear algebra. I've also been working through a few books (Spivak's "Calculus" and "Calculus on Manifolds," and am about to start Birkhoff and Maclane's "Survey of Modern Algebra." Although I love the material, and enjoy learning it, the independent studying probably stems from some feeling of inadequacy due to my past immaturity.

I got a 169/170 Q, 165/170 V on the general GRE. Also, I think I can crack 80% on the subject test, but am not overly confident about this. One glaring hole is that I have done zero research, and have done nothing extracurricular - I literally have nothing "extra" going for me.

My concern is that I've seen the resumes of many people accepted to top universities (PhD track), and I just don't stack up. But if my goal is to become a professor one day, it seems that where I go to school is extremely important. So should I just hope that I can get accepted into a top 30-50 school, or would it be beneficial to consider improving my resume in a solid Masters program so that better schools become available?

And if a masters is a viable option, what caliber of school would I need to excel at in order to be a competitive applicant for a top 10 PhD program?

If you have a thin B.S. background in math, it is definitely very helpful to get a M.S. in math before (re-) applying to Ph.D. programs. (I say this having been on the Grad Admissions cte, and having been Dir Grad Studies in two different incarnations...) In the U.S., many undergrad programs are really very thin, due to the requirement (otherwise wholesome) of "breadth".

The "undergrad research" episodes in summers, and during the academic year, are good for generating enthusiasm and camaraderie, and especially for getting outside the rigid classroom/textbook atmosphere, but (apart from very broad features) are not at all good indicators of what serious research is or will be like. Those programs are designed to be fun (pizza parties, etc), so "doing research" in that sense is fun for nearly everyone.

So, apply to MS/PhD programs at the top 30-50 schools, and do the best job you can in the standard/required PhD curriculum (usually, there is no distinction between PhD curriculum and MS, except that the latter is designed to accommodate, if necessary, weaker students, perhaps weak enough so that the MS will be their last degree in Mathematics... don't be misled into taking an "easy route"). And, in the course of doing the coursework, don't be a stranger to the instructors of those courses, who will be your letter-writers for either re-application to "better" schools in a year or two, or will be your letter writers if you need to re-apply to that institution itself for the PhD program, for bureaucratic reasons.

Grades in non-math courses, and grades in calculus and lower-division courses don't matter much, although obviously good grades are a not a bad thing. Admissions committees are well-acquainted with the changes people go through around age 20 and so on. The question is not so much what silly things one has done a few years back, but where one is heading now, and what documentable evidence there is for this.

In particular, although self-learning is the most significant long-term way to develop scholarship, it is obviously hard to document. Perhaps the best way is to sign up for courses that appear to re-iterate (serious) content you've already studied. Presumably, you absolutely ace the material and draw the instructor's attention... since self-study beyond "requirements" is, strangely-or-not, extremely rare. Evidence of non-passivity is excellent, if it really proves to be what you feel it is (rather than, say, mere obsessiveness).

So, again, yes, think about "proving yourself" during a year or two of "MS work". No downside, really.


How should I interpret the result of AMS annual survey I'm going to be a first year graduate student in mathematics and is thinking about which field to specialized in. Besides the important factors such as potential advisor I can find, personal interest, and my background knowledge I want to know the academic job prospective after graduation.

I take a look at recent AMS survey, for example,
AMS survey 2012-2013, and for each field of thesis I sum the number of first 8 row("Math Public Large" to "Biostatistics") and divide the number by "Total" to estimate the chance of random Ph.D. in that field get an academic postdoc(in US). I'm slightly worry about the fields I'm interested in have relatively low ratio on this.

My question is, do I interpret the data correctly? If so, how much weight should I put into these data when determining field of specialization? If not, what should I look for?

Academic job prospects are an important consideration, but the AMS survey results are too coarse-grained for that.  They average together people from very different circumstances, which means they aren't representative of any individual job applicant.  Some people have much better chances that one would guess from these numbers, while others have much worse chances.

Instead, I'd recommend estimating your chances based on your advisor's previous students and others who have graduated recently from your department.  These are both much more highly correlated with your own chances than your broad subfield is.  You could view the subfield as a lower-order correction factor, but I'm not convinced it really matters (I'd bet it disappears in the noise).  I'd also recommend having a detailed discussion with your advisor about the job market and how to position yourself to do well.

Aside from averaging together students at many different sorts of departments, the field-based numbers conflate several issues: how many people were forced to take a nonacademic job unwillingly, how many people chose one over academic offers, and how many people never particularly wanted to work in academia in the first place.  These are all correlated with the field, sometimes obviously (e.g., statistics) and sometimes less so.  For example, my impression is that some fields are more likely to attract unambitious students who aren't really on track for academic jobs.  I don't have any statistical evidence for this, but I think such students are more likely to choose algebra than geometry, say, because they probably took an algebra course but not a geometry course in their undergraduate studies.  If you aren't one of these students, then their existence says nothing about your chances.

In any case, the take-home message is that it's difficult or impossible to extract useful predictions for your own case from this data.


Is it advisable to give a handout with the slides to the jury of my PhD defense? I am preparing for my PhD oral defense in engineering. It consists of two parts: first, a 40-minute long (public) presentation; then, Q&A with the jury.

Question: Is it advisable to give a handout with presentation slides to the jury?

In such a document, there would be 2-3 slides per page plus a large margin so that the jury could take notes, as well as the bibliography with references I cite in the slides. There are about 30 slides, which are very illustrative (i.e. without complex equations, but rather made of diagrams with little text).

The pros would be to make it easier for the jury to take notes, follow the slides (slides are  projected above my head in the amphitheater) or go back if they missed a step. Moreover, most of the jury are not native speakers, and both the slides and the talk will be given in English.

The cons would be that they could be tempted to 'fast-forward' and/or get distracted instead of concentrating on my talk. (Even if I do acknowledge it's hard to be fully concentrated during 40 minutes straight.) They would also not benefit from the explanations (i.e. the step by step construction of diagrams using beamer's slides).

There are no fixed rules, neither by the University, nor by common practice in my sub-field. My supervisor has no opinion on the topic.

In my department, students usually give out a handout with slides to members of the committee. Many seem to find it helpful - they use it exactly as you said:

  to take notes, to follow the slides (slides are projected above my head in the amphitheater) or to go back if they missed a step

They also use it in other ways - for example, if they want to ask you a question about a previous slide, they can refer to the handout to say "Can you please go back to Slide 5" instead of having you flip through the slides one at a time and saying "Stop!" when you reach the one they're looking for.

Some don't use the handout at all.

In all of the defenses I have attended, I have never seen a committee member get distracted by the handout, or read the handout instead of paying attention to the speaker.

So, based on my experience I would consider the handout to have some potential benefits, and very little or no disadvantages.


Removing first name on request by supervisor: how to avoid complications in the future Say I have three names viz... Firstname Middlename Surname. My first name is quite long. My supervisor is requesting that I only use my Middle and Surnames. This occured with my first manuscript with him (he has two short names). Although, I have one publication (with my full three names) before studying under my current supervisor, I have tried to do this. My ORCID account contains the three names. IEEE membership name emphasizes my Firstname and Surname. My question is if I would like to use only my Middle and Surnames now, what are the things I must do and precautions to take to ensure consistency and avoid complications in the future.

Use the name that you wish to be known by within academia. For the next 40 years (depending on age and career), you will build a reputation attached to your name. That name will be on your papers, announcing you for presentations, on your name tag at conferences, as the author of any books you publish and for many other uses.

Your supervisor is not asking for a trivial change for his or her convenience, your supervisor is asking for you to either give up your preferred name throughout your career, or to have multiple names on publications. While it is certainly fixable to have multiple names, it is harder to ensure you get credit for all your work.

You could perhaps ask why your supervisor wants you to use a different name. There may be a good reason in which case you can take that into account in your decision. Since you have a long name, do people use the full name when addressing you? Would it be reasonable to use perhaps a shorter version of your first name if that's how you are known?


Interdisciplinary PhDs? Is there such a thing as an interdisciplinary PhD, where the student chooses the fields, courses, etc.? If so, which U.S. universities offer such a thing?

For a while I was a graduate student in the math department of Portland State University. At Portland State, the Ph.D. program in math requires students to have an "allied area" (field of study other than mathematics). The student's thesis must be related to this allied area, the student must take about 25% percent of their courses in the allied area, and the student must pass a qualifying exam in the allied area. Thus the whole program is designed to be interdisciplinary from the get-go.

(Side note: The actual name of degree is "Ph.D. in Mathematical Sciences", and it definitely differs from the traditional math Ph.D.)


Changing PhD programs: should I submit a recommendation letter from my old advisor if it's not purely positive? I am in the process of changing PhD programs, and my previous supervisor cannot write a letter that is purely positive. The main difficulty is that she wants to include details about what happened at my previous university; however, we do not agree on all these details, and she seems to be unwilling to debate the past. She believes that I should (or I may have to) explain myself and that I can't justify everything I have done in my previous institution.

Other faculty members I have talked to are of the opinion that if I have to explain myself like this then it is not a recommendation letter anymore and recommend not asking her for a reference. This is difficult because I can get other letters, but the strongest letter that I got was from my first supervisor, and I expect the other ones to be good but not stellar.

Not all cases are equivalent. Unfortunately, switching PhD programs is something that is not often done. This is such an exceptional case, that I think it's one of the few instances in which a purely positive letter from a supervisor is not called for.

The basic issue here is that the people reviewing your application need to understand why you left the previous program, and be able to judge whether the issues were environmental (over which you had no control, and therefore would be unlikely to be repeated) or structural (likely to reoccur, and thus reducing the likelihood you'll finish the new program).

Consequently, I would find a recommendation letter from the previous advisor that is only positive highly suspicious. If everything is positive, why are you leaving? Someone needs to explain the situation clearly, and we need to hear from both you and the advisor what each of you believes happened, and why a "fresh start" is needed. If somebody was applying for admission to my PhD program after having started one elsewhere, and if I were at all interested in the candidate, the first thing I would be doing is contact the old advisor to understand why she wrote such a strong letter. Because otherwise the pieces wouldn't "add up" correctly.

Moreover, I don't think you can submit an application for admission to a new PhD program without a statement of support from your old supervisor. If you don't provide a statement from her, it will again look suspicious, and damage your chances of admission. (The person reviewing your application will think: what is this candidate trying to hide?)


When is it acceptable to issue an update to a manuscript that is still under review? 16 months ago, I finished a paper A and submitted it to a journal X. It is currently still under review. (For the journal's defence, it must be said that the paper is quite long - 89 pages).

This paper contains a proposition (let's call it A.1) whose proof relies on a lemma (let's call it A.2). However neither this proof, nor even the statement of Lemma A.2, have been given explicitly in paper A. Instead, I just wrote: "the proof of Proposition A.1 is analogous to the proof of Proposition a.1 from my earlier paper a".

(That earlier paper contains a detailed proof of Proposition a.1, which is done by using a lemma a.2. The results a.1 and a.2 are basically special cases of A.1 and A.2; the statements, and proofs, of the results A.x are very closely parallel to the statements and proofs of the results a.x - you can obtain the former from the latter by a simple search-and-replace.)

In the meanwhile, I wrote another paper B, that heavily relies on the results of paper A. In particular, at some point, I actually needed lemma A.2. So I made explicit the statement of A.2, and refered to paper A for the proof.

I submitted paper B to a journal Y, where it was rejected. The editor said that the result was not good enough for the journal (fine; I'll aim lower next time), but also said that the reviewers complained about the reference to paper A for the proof of A.2 (which did not explicitly appear there). They were understandably confused by this; reading my paper failed to convince them that my argument has no gaps.

Is it acceptable to email the editor of journal X and send them an updated version of paper A, where I make explicit the proof of Proposition A.1 (by stating and proving Lemma A.2)?

Now to rebut some of the obvious answers:

Redoing the proof of lemma A.2 in paper B is of course technically possible, but would require reintroducing a lot of formalism from paper A (Proposition A.1 appears on page 83 of paper A... and the whole paper B is only 26 pages long!) Besides, I feel that Lemma A.2 really belongs in paper A (it is after all an essential step to prove Proposition A.1, so it is already implicitly present there). I would really like to avoid this option at all costs.
Waiting for the answer from the journal X would mean holding up the publication of paper B, which is very costly for me: in the current climate, I feel that publishing as much as possible as early as possible is critical to secure a permanent job.

I think you are focusing too much on the details, which may be confusing the issue.  It sounds to me like your goal is to make sure reviewers of paper B are convinced by your arguments, rather than to write up a proper proof of A.2.

It is a perfectly acceptable and common thing to refer to paper A for a proof of say Lemma 1 even if Lemma 1 is not explicitly stated or proved in paper A.  (E.g., "by a mild extension of the proof of X in [A], one gets...")  What is important here is two things:

your explanation of exactly how it follows from [A] is clear to someone who has not read [A]
that there really is nothing new to check and you are not just being lazy

From what you wrote, it sounds like at least the first part was an issue for you.  And if you can't make the proof of your lemma transparent in such a way, then you should write down the proof, either in paper A or paper B (possibly in an appendix).

Since you've made it clear you don't want to do the latter, and this sounds like a minor change to paper A (just adding in a small amount of details), it's fine to revise your paper A and update it on the arXiv (so make sure your paper B references the new arXiv version) but there's no need to revise your submission of paper A for a minor change.  You can just point out you made this change upon resubmission after getting the referee reports.


Is an ungraded pass going to affect my PhD applications? Currently my MA gpa is a 70/100 and I'm studying in the UK. I just received the grade of my latest assignment, that is a 68. That means that my gpa is now bellow 70. However, the university is giving me the option of an ungraded pass for this assignment, so that my gpa will not be affected. If I select to apply for an ungraded pass, instead of a 68 in that assignment, are my future PhD applications going to be affected? I am concerned that an ungraded pass might not look good on my final record and in my PhD applications. Additionaly, I am still working on my dissertation, so if I achieve a high grade for it I can still improve my gpa. What do you think is the best course of action? Thank you!

I have doubts that it will matter. The reasons for taking a pass might be obvious to a reader. Letting the numbers fall where they may might seem more honest.
But also consider that few (if any) programs will automatically exclude you for GPA alone. People are admitted into doctoral programs based on many things, none of which (other than dishonesty, perhaps) are determinative alone. People on an admissions committee will want to make a prediction about your likely success in the program and thereafter as well as your readiness to do research.
I also suspect that most committees will be a bit generous in the age of coronavirus, though that doesn't lessen the competition that every student faces. Make your best case for admission no matter which way you choose to jump on this (minor) issue.


Shall I quit academia or continue doing research without too much luck? My first three year postdoc was almost over and no good publications came out. The thing is that my carefully crafted papers are getting rejected again and again by decent journals (not that good ones). Knowing how bad the academic job market is now, I have a feeling that I may not make it in academia. I could do another postdoc after my 3 year contract or probably choose to quit.

If I am bad at research, I would quit now for sure. It is just that somehow my mentor has been supportive of me staying in academia and she is very famous. She can't be too wrong, right? Also, I got many projects going well. I think I am pretty good at research. I hope one of those projects will end up in a good journal.  But, it has been three years after my phd.

I came to Europe to do a phd as a poor Chinese guy. At the time, I didn't know much about English and only learned my current major though a 3 year master program in China. I worked hard and learned fast to catch up. But, things just wouldn't click. I did my job but the journals just wont accept my papers. Bad luck? probably. Or, something wrong with my topic or approaches.

If I do another postdoc, I will be way over 30. My life already suffered from my research career. A lonely Chinese guy in a foreign country. No money. No nothing. Just my research. Another postdoc without much hope of making it in academia could cause damages to my life, from which I may never recover.

Shall I finish more projects and try my luck to do another postdoc ? Or just quit, even though people say i am good. Being good isn't very useful in academia I guess. Only papers count.

You write "My life already suffered from my research career." This is worrying.
Think about this: what do you need the most for a satisfying life? Is it being close to home? Having a fulfilling relationsship? Having a garden? Living in China? Living near the sea? Being a researcher? Find out what it is for you and focus at first on that. Then find out what else you can do while realising your first priority.

Don't get too hung up on Academia. Being a researcher is not a higher calling from some God, at the end of the day it's just a job. There are many good and satisfying jobs out there. Find out what else the world has to offer.


Acknowledgement section I am tempted to thank the cast of a television show in my acknowledgement section of my thesis. Has anyone else done this?...the show was literally the only thing I would watch while writing...and I really don't have a lot of other people to thank.

Acknowledgement section is actually a place where a researcher specifies the contributions of other people/organizations or even the TV show like in your case, to the research. However, it mostly transformed into one/two page to thank first your advisor/coadvisor than colleagues than your friends than family and if there is, your significant other.

I really don't understand why it evolved to that but still, you can really write whatever you want there.

"I want to acknowledge "" TV show as their performance greatly helped me to write and tidy up my thesis". I would write like this.


Can I write a paper out of a simple idea? Sometimes I have simple ideas that can be useful. They could be obvious or not, or it is possible that no one ever considered them the way I did.

For example:

To gather information about the statistics of the unemployed in a city or state, I suggest to build a website in which unemployed people register and enter their information. This information is very useful for decisionmakers on unemployment. But, after a while these statistics are not valid. On the other hand, unemployed people are very reluctant to update their employment status via the Internet or they don't have access to it. To solve this problem, we can send an SMS to them and they answer with 1 (as employed) and 0 (as still unemployed), then we integrate these answers to the central database. This way, we have up-to-date information in periods.

The idea was that simple, however maybe no one in our country implemented it. Could it be a paper? If yes, what can it include? Because it is as short as the above. Should I, for example, explain how we integrate the SMSs to the database (however, it may be simple too or the subject of other tools or papers). If I implement the system, should I provide the statistics of unemployment in a city or the percentage who contribute the plan? Totally, I don't know what else such a paper should cover.

For another example, suppose that I am the first one who invented the sliced bread. How long could my paper be and on what would I probably argue?

However it was just an example and after some research I may realize it is not workable, but I should say I actually built the website for an organization in my city one year ago (However not the SMS and updating part), then I was thinking if I can make a paper out of it. Maybe I could use some parts of the real data I gained in such paper, for example the people who registered (which was more than 80% of all the unemployed ranging from 20 to 40 years old) and those who had a cell phone (which was more than 98% of them), this topic shed some lights on my way.

I like papers about simple ideas. (I am writing one right now, hope others like it as well.) They are far easier to communicate and understand than complex ideas.

Then again, the question is why nobody else has thought about an idea if it is all that simple. In your specific example, the idea may not be workable, because people may simply delete the update SMS without replying to it. (And those that do answer may not be representative of your sample as a whole.)

So I would say that writing a paper about a simple idea is good, but it needs to meet the same conditions as any other paper: it needs to show that the idea actually works. An idea by itself is usually not worth an entire paper. Having the idea is often the easy part. Showing that it works is where the actual work happens.

So: Build your website for one city, let it run for six months, then write a paper about what you learned.

How to show that something "works" may well be the hard part. (For instance, in some parts of machine learning it is easy to "show" that a method is better than an established method by testing both on many datasets but then only reporting those on which the proposed method is superior.) Some journals/conferences/reviewers may be more stringent about what they consider proof that something "works". You may be able to get a publication out of a proof of concept by just building the website, without running it productively. Or by running it productively, but without assessing in some way whether the statistics collected by the website are actually more accurate than those collected in some other way. Look at what kinds of papers your target venue or community publishes, and let yourself be guided by that.

EDIT 2016-04-07, about that article based on a simple idea: it turns out that this simple idea (a randomized probability integral transform) was really good. So good, in fact, that multiple people had had the same idea previously, and at least partly independently of each other. Happily enough, a guru in the field pointed this out to me when I circulated a preprint and didn't savage me, but pointed out shortcomings of the rPIT and possible new lines of inquiry. The paper has just been published.

Bottom line: your simple idea may be good, but chances are that those ideas that are both simple and good have already been worked on.


Undergraduate research field different from PhD field I am a Physics undergrad who is interested in pursuing a PhD in pure maths in the future (algebraic geometry/topology) but I am a bit unsure. My question is quite general, and I don't wish to provide more background for fear of bias in the answers.

My question: Is it is advisable/possible/unfavorable/favorable to apply for a PhD in a field, different from that in which you have done most of your undergraduate research?

My research (includes just reading and understanding papers, writing summaries until now, I havent published anything) mostly includes Quantum field theory, and gauge theory. Would the selection committee turn down an application to a pure maths field, if I have no research experience whatsoever?

I would also like to ask the question other way round. What if I concentrate my undergraduate research SOLELY on topics in pure maths such as algebraic geometry/topology and take other physics courses, would I be able to apply to a string theory PhD with a high chance of success?

Should I consider spending time on both of these (which is almost an impossible task), to improve my chances in both the areas or would research in one area, and grad level courses in the other suffice?

In brief: Should the PhD field you are applying to be the same as your undergraduate research area?

You can definitely apply in a different field than your undergraduate. Some major fields of research don't even exist as undergraduate majors in most colleges (e.g., neuroscience), so it's understood that many students will come from different backgrounds.

The more similar your major is to the new topic, the easier the learning curve. If your major is significantly different you may want to take some post-bachelors undergraduate courses before beginning the PhD program to bring yourself up to speed.


Should I be concerned about student access to a test bank? If I am using a test bank to formulate a test based on a textbook, should I be concerned about students getting access to the test bank? I have read that student use of a test bank is cheating, but I guess I don't agree with that 100%. If I am drawing test questions out of exercise sets, how is that any different? The test banks usually have hundreds of questions to choose from, so if the students are learning the test bank well enough that they can answer some fractional selection from that test bank, it seems like a win to me. If they are studying questions, at the end of the day they are learning. Or is that the wrong way to look at it?

As long as the test bank has enough questions to cover the material I'd not be concerned.  Those who work at it will learn.  I've given my own students "sample exams" for years, then put some of the sample questions on the real exam.  The students who were going to earn grades of A anyway got them right.  The students who were going to earn unsatisfactory grades anyway did not.

A colleague performed the experiment of handing out the course final exam a week before the exam date.  Students were encouraged to get help studying, but then had to take the exam again in class.  He says it did not change the grade distribution at all.


Citing multiple references in one number While reading papers I have found some paper where multiple papers are listed in a single reference:

In the text, this is woven in with “The Cornell group [3] …”. Other papers have something like this and then use “[3-5]” and have the three consecutive references.

Is this just another way to refer to multiple papers if they are not disambiguated within the paper?

You are right about the function of this, but I think it's often not the best practice (although this is strictly my own opinion).  Personally, I avoid combining references entirely.  In my opinion, it can be used legitimately, when the papers combined into a single reference are by (mostly) the same authors and cover the continuous development of a single topic.  However, I mostly see it used by people who want to pour a large number of references into a single number, perhaps to save a little bit of space.


Resubmitted paper is rejected by editor after two months, what should I do? About one year ago, I submitted a paper to a top journal in my field. After waiting for 4 months, the manuscript is rejected with one positive, one negative, and a neutral (including many revise suggestions) comments. There is one common comment: the manuscript is too long. Nevertheless, the editor kindly suggested that I could revise my paper along all the lines suggested by the referees and resubmit my paper.

I carefully modified the paper according to the comments and replied the questions and suggestions from the three referees point by point, then resubmitted it after about four months form the first rejection. This time, after two months, the editor replied us as following without any further comment from any referee.

"I would like to thank you for taking the time to redraft your manuscript, to be considered as a resubmission to xxx. I have carefully read your new manuscript, and I am sorry to have to inform you that your paper is not suitable for publication in xxx. The manuscript still lacks a clear statement of its aims and motivation. (Two example from the editor's viewpoint). While I appreciate that you have taken significant steps to reduce the manuscript length, I still found it overly long, and the writing still suffers from many grammatical errors. I am sorry not to have more positive news."

There is no any comment for us after the two+ months' review. I guess our paper was not even sent to referees (previous or new ones). In my supervisor's experience, editorial rejection is typically very fast, a couple of weeks at most.

My questions are:

Being forced to wait two months for a desk rejection without any comment, is that normal for a reputable journal? What should I do to acquire a potential comments, if any?
Is it appropriate to send an email to coordinate with the editor for a new resubmission? And how much is my chance?
What is the most probable attitude of the editor: does the editor really not like it?

Thank you very much for sharing your invaluable experience!

The editor's comments clearly point to three things:
1. The manuscript lacks a clear statement of its aims and motivation
2. The manuscript is too long even after revision
3. There are grammatical errors in the manuscript

Regarding the second and third points, I think getting the manuscript professionally edited might be a good solution. However, regarding the first point, for a study to have reasonable impact, its aims and motivations need to be clear. You can perhaps do some rethinking around this point and take your supervisor's guidance to make these aspects clearer.

Now let's come to your questions.

Timelines and procedures are not uniform across journals, and it is not uncommon for a manuscript to be rejected without any reviewer comments after two months, particularly, since, it looks like the paper wasn't sent for review a second time. However, you can write a polite email to the editor requesting him/her to send you the reviewer comments if any.
I think the editor has made it amply clear that the paper is not suitable for publication in the journal. I personally feel it would be better to submit the paper to another journal, but if you are very keen on this journal, there is no harm in writing to the editor inquiring if he/she would be willing to take another look at it after it is professionally edited to reduce the length and fix the grammatical errors. You should also inform him/her that you will rework on the aims and motivations to make them clearer. Regarding how much of a chance you have, I am really not sure; depends on the editor.
I don't think the editor doesn't like the manuscript at all: he/she has probably seen some merit in it; else you would not have received the revise and resubmit decision the first time. However, the editor is clearly not very satisfied with the revisions. You should actually have taken care of the length and grammatical errors at the time of the revision. That would definitely have given you a better chance.

One word of advice: even if you submit to another journal, make sure you get the grammatical errors corrected before you do so.


Can offers to international students be rescinded if grades received following the application slightly lower their GPA? I am an international student who has been accepted into mathematics department at UCLA.

In my application for the last semester I gave my grade point average as 9.5/10. I was taking two courses and was hoping that I would get a 10 and a 9, making the average 9.5.

But unfortunately the grades in both the courses slipped up to a 9 and a 8 , making the average 8.5/10.

I haven't informed them of this, and I was hoping that it wouldn't matter. I am going to get my visa next week, and I am really paranoid that my admission may get rescinded.

What do you guys think ?

As someone with some experience on the other end of math graduate admissions, let me preface this by saying I really doubt that anyone cares; a program like UCLA looks at a lot more than grades (especially for foreign students).  At this point it would be really disruptive for them to drop a student from the program (it's not like there are other students of the same caliber waiting around to be admitted), so they are not looking for reasons to do so.  This is probably hard to imagine after many years of people telling your grades are the most important thing, but for math grad school, they are really actually not.  They are a proxy for the ability to do good research in math, and the people running the program know they are a bad proxy and take them with a grain of salt.

So, the important thing to do here is calm down.  Imagine this from the perspective of the department; all the people making these decisions have a lot of other things to worry about, you are one of many grad students they admitted this year, and these grades are a very small part of why. Your grades are not something they want to expend energy paying attention to.   Even if your offer is conditional, I think this condition would only be used in really dramatic cases; I've never heard of this happening.

Look carefully at your offer letter.  Either it will say the offer is contingent on your grades this semester, or it won't.  (Incidentally, this info should have been in your post; answering questions well on this site is hard enough without people withholding obviously important information).  If it doesn't, and they haven't asked about your grades, then drop the subject from your mind and never speak of it again.  If it does, I would probably still not do anything unless they ask.  If they really want that information they'll ask for it.  If they ask, just write back saying "I got an 8/10 in X and 9/10 in Y.  Looking forward to meeting you in August." Don't try to explain why your grades are not what you expected. Just act as if everything is normal, and I'm sure things will be fine.


How should a university deal with outsourced essay writing? My campus is full of flyers, typically attached to lightposts and so, advertising to write essays for money.  There's plenty of such services offered on the internet as well.  Presumably, many students make use of such service.

Clearly, it is unwise for students to make use of such services, and I suppose it violates regulations.  How can a university deal with the issue of ghostwriting?  That means: how to identify probable cases of ghostwriting; how to proof that ghostwriting took place; and how to sanction it?  It seems considerably harder to tackle than plagiarism.

First, let me say that you should read the answers to my related question. One answer is quite clear that you should not even bother checking (the author of that answer did admit being uncomfortable with that answer...as I am).

This is a significant problem at my university. One way we try to address it is that we have students verbally answer a quick, random question about their assignment.

Good news: This does catch some students when they can only answer "uh, ah, ummm."

Bad news: Some students still use ghost writers and just memorize the paper so they can answer any question about it. If the assessment covers all the learning outcomes then it can still result in students learning.

One thing that I generally do is, throughout the semester, I keep track of the "quality level" I see each student is at. This takes several sessions and when classes are quite large there might not be enough interaction to support this strategy. However, if you do have this information, you can use it to compare to the overall quality of their written work. If they never know anything in class but they write "golden" work, then it is a warning sign.

It is important that it is just a warning sign because there are some students who write well but are not so great at in-class interaction. You always need to use your judgment.

As far as how we handle it, we consider using a ghost writer an identical offense to plagiarism with identical punishments.


Should I list all of my scientific writings and technical reports (including those written for coursework) on my resume? I am an undergrad preparing my resume for grad school application. During my undergrad I have done many projects, including a few real research projects and also those for courses as final projects, that were just about designing something rather routine (a simple robot for example), or a compilation of other research works. Most of these class projects have had a report (a writing).

Since I have just one official peer reviewed conference paper, is it a good idea to list all those technical reports in my resume in the Publications section? Or, conversely, adding these may decrease the value of that peer reviewed paper and making the resume look unprofessional?

As Sverre says in a comment, you should make sure that your peer-reviewed publication stands out. It is common, in an academic CV, to put such publications into their own separate section.

As far as your other technical writing, my inclination would be to include these only if they are available to the public in some way, as opposed to just being pieces of coursework. For example, if you have an undergraduate thesis which is lodged in your university library, or have (co-)written a technical report which is available from your department, then these should be included in the CV. They are a class of publication. But essays and reports that were only submitted for assessment are not the same sort of thing. You can certainly mention them in the part of your CV where you talk about your various courses and projects, but it would be misleading to list them among your publications.


doing masters while working? I work full time as a bit of a mix: sql server DBA, BI developer, DW admin, ETL developer…

I hold a BS in Systems Engineering, and wanted to continue studying…

What are my options to balance a possible Masters in business intelligence and at the same time working full time?

I live and work in SouthWest London. Work is a bit flexible (I would be able to modify my working hours a little bit).

I have no knowledge in current options, but; is there any university in London where I would be able to do a masters in BI, attending to classes maybe only Friday and Saturdays?!

I am currently doing the exact same thing you are wanting to do: working full time as a data engineer and pursuing a Master's degree part-time in data analytics. It took me a very long time to find a program that was focused on BI or anything near that since it is still a relatively new field (new as in gaining traction in academia). Also, Business Intelligence is very wide, it encompasses a lot of different things. University College London (UCL) offers a part-time master's degree in Data Science which encompasses some BI stuff and more. If that's not exactly what you meant by "BI", then I would recommend searching for schools in London (or worldwide, in which case you'd be looking for online programs - which is also very possible) that offer a BI program, and then seeing if it can be part-time or not.


How much involvement should my advisor have in deciding my availability and actions for me? I worked in the industry for a few years before starting my PhD and learned many do's and don'ts in the workplace for how you guide subordinates to attend meetings and do things you want them to do. I'm having trouble finding the right mix of transparency/professionalism/availability that I can expect to have with my advisor. Some examples that seem to be ok with my advisor related to availability include:

Advisor tells me I should work and come in over academic breaks
When I'm late for a meeting, sends me an email that says "you're late, get here". Advisor is often late for their own meetings.
On a flight back from a conference, holds a research meeting.
When scheduling a meeting, advisor asks for conflicts, then judges the importance of my conflict vs the meeting. Tells me the meeting is more important.
Advisor schedules recurring meeting over the time I have to eat lunch, tells me I should eat during the meeting
Urges that I come to weekend/post-5pm informal meetups, if I say I cannot attend, asks why my conflict is more important?

Other oddities include:

During research meeting with 15 students, the meeting table is crowded. I grab a chair 5 feet away. Advisor tells me to stand for the meeting (with a laptop).
Advisor tells me I must share a room with another student at the conference hotel

I can't help but feel demeaned by items on this list. I'm a bit older than other students and have a family, so my conflicts are more frequent. Is this advisor-advisee treatment common in academia? I'm trying to seek out the norms of this community.

As with most things, tone matters. All the items on your list don't scream terrible unprofessionalism to me, if done in the right tone and in moderation (ok, the "tells me to stand" one is a bit weird). For instance, I would not force a student to blow off their anniversary dinner for a standard meeting, but I have certainly asked them to cancel some other weekend appointments because of an important deadline on Monday. Further, you mention meetings after 5PM - given that much of my research is done in international cooperation, Skype calls at terrible times are unfortunately not unheard of in my group as well.

I can't help but notice that (as ff524 already mentions), the majority of your items are not so much about professionalism than about time planning. Indeed, in academia, you may need to get used to the fact that most professors require students to be flexible, maybe more so than in larger corporations (but not unlike startup companies, for instance). Nine-to-five workers are typically not popular in academic environments.

You added:

  Advisor tells me I must share a room with another student at the conference hotel

The exact same thing happened to me as an employee of a large, international company. Not usual, but yeah - happens if funds for travel are low for some reason.


What constitutes as stealing of an idea? I have recently been accused by someone of stealing their idea and doing the work required. In fact they had come to me to do, let's say, a literature review because they didn't have the expertise to do one themselves. They gave me an umbrella topic and told me to figure the rest out. I ran with it and narrowed down the topic to a specific research question. Step by step I made sure to keep the person looped in and updated on my progress, as well as answered their questions (such as: what is the research question? What does this mean? What is the point of doing this review?). When it came time to move it forward, the person bailed and said they were too busy to continue.
A year later, I nudged them again as I wanted to finish it off and said I have other resources now (ask a student to do some data validation) to help complete the next step so we could start writing. The person agreed and we finally started to talk about authorship. They asked what I wanted, I said first as I had done a major part of the work. They also needed a first so I counter suggested we do first co authors as it had requires/requires both of our efforts. They were extremely reluctant, saying that I had stolen their idea and that it was wrong for me to do the work when they didn't have the time, and suddenly say that I deserved first because I had done the work but they also needed me to teach them step by step on how to do the lit review.
I feel that I have not been deceitful by hiding information or falsely claiming authorship away from this person. I believe it was a joint effort although I'm not sure what the norm is. What does actually constitute as idea stealing? Did I overstep by asking to be recognised as an equal contributor?

This answer assumed that OP was in some way senior to their counterpart, either in position or experience. Since this assumption is not true (OP is a masters student, the other person is a PhD student), it seems there is some fault for both parties in how they communicated expectations at the beginning of the project.

It's going to be difficult if not impossible for anyone here to judge this because none of us are in the situation and have the daily exposure required to do so.
However, with the limited information you give here, it sounds to me like someone came to you with an idea, and rather than help them with their idea you judged yourself more capable to do the work and took off with it.
It's like instead of helping a student understand their confusion on part of their homework, you've done most of the assignment for them, while keeping them informed of your progress. In doing so, yes you've helped them complete their homework, but you've stolen from them the opportunity to learn while doing it. Or imagine a 5 year old assembling a train set. They've run into a problem and can't get a loop connected because they've installed too tight of a bend, and ask for help. Do you provide some suggestions on how they might fix the problem? do you rearrange a piece or two to help demonstrate this? Or do you wait for them to go to sleep and show them when they wake up how you've completed it all for them and solved all their problems? Clearly you get the credit for completing the train set, but was it fair?
It sounds a bit like you've stolen an idea to me. The conversation about the project and authorship should have occurred at the beginning before you decided to "run with it", or at least in one of the intervening times when this person indicated they didn't have the time right now, not when you'd like to finish off the project and already did all the work. Arguably the other person should have brought this up on their own then and not now, but there are various reasons (such as social hierarchies, cultural norms, and their own personality) that may have prevented them from doing so, and if you are the more experienced person in the situation the onus is on you.
You very much may deserve the majority of credit on the final work. The infraction is not in deceit about what you were working on, but on taking on so much of the project that it became yours without getting permission or an understanding up front. Especially if all you were asked was if you would help with a literature review.