Is someone who solely contributes negative feedback to a paper considered an author? Say person A and person B are collaborating on a mathematics paper. It goes like this: person A repeatedly suggests proofs, and person B repeatedly finds flaws in them. Over time, this process culminates in a correct proof.

Does person B deserve to be an author on this paper? One might argue that the final paper would not have existed without B, so they deserve authorship. On the other hand, they did not actually contribute anything in the final work - each successive proof was generated by A alone.

Wikipedia says that the development of RSA went something like this: "Rivest and Shamir, as computer scientists, proposed many potential functions while Adleman, as a mathematician, was responsible for finding their weaknesses," until Rivest hit on the final answer. But that might be overly reductive, and I don't know of any other examples.

(As a final note, I'm not A or B in this scenario - I'm just curious.)

To moderate Yemon Choi's comment:  yes.  Your first assertion is that A and B are collaborating, which means they should be co-authors, unless one actively backs out.

For a mathematical project, it's easy to have lots of ideas but not enough time to pursue them all to see which (if any) work.  If someone can shoot down ideas and tell you they definitely (or with high likelihood) won't work, this can help put you on the right track.  So in your situation I would say B was instrumental in finding a correct solution.

(In a somewhat different abstract scenario where B dismisses some approaches to a problem that A suggests, and B does not otherwise actively work on the project, it may depends on the situation and they should have a discussion about whether B is a co-author or not.  And some people will have different opinions about the same situation, e.g. RS versus A in the RSA example.)

In general in a mathematical collaboration, if there's one key idea it's unlikely that both collaborators arrive at it together.  Maybe through discussion they enhance each other's understanding of the problem, and then one will have the key idea and the other will encourage/validate it.  That doesn't mean was the other person was unnecessary, even if you can't
pinpoint parts of the final paper as being "their contribution."

(And if collaborations became competitive to the point of dropping co-authors just because the didn't see the final solution first, who would want to collaborate?)


Why are journals telling me that my article is plagiarized even though I wrote it by myself? Recently, I wrote an article, and I'm trying to submit it somewhere, but two journals told me that my article is plagiarized even up to 70%!

I'm 100% sure that it's not plagiarized because I wrote it by myself.
The only thing that I suspect caused this problem is that I posted the pre-print online in ECSarxiv, and I think they found my pre-print and think my paper is plagiarized! My name on the pre-print is exactly the same as in the submitted paper.
I checked the pre-print policy of these journals, and they clearly stated that they don't have a problem with pre-prints.
I checked it with Turnitin, and it says there is no plagiarism in my article. I also searched the Internet for random sentences from my article and it just shows my pre-print.
I complained after I received the rejection, pointed out to my pre-print, and asked them to name the paper I allegedly plagiarized from. However, they did not respond back to me. I now sent an email to editor-in-chief and I'm waiting for response.
I am confident that the journals are reputable (Elsevier and Springer).

Any ideas or suggestions?

Chances are the journal ran your paper through an automated plagiarism checker (the only realistic way to check for plagiarism these days) and this 70% number is what the program found. That you found nothing using Turnitin isn't enough evidence to prove there was no plagiarism: a plagiarism checker is only as good as the data it has, and it's possible Turnitin doesn't have the original paper.

Having said that the journal should tell you which paper they think you've plagiarized from, as well as which sentences are plagiarized. If they don't, you should absolutely write back to ask. From your comments you've already done that, so there's nothing to do now except wait. The fact that at least two journals have checked your paper and found plagiarism is a bad sign; on the bright side, you can ask both journals for more details and it's less likely they both don't answer.

If they respond you'll be able to fix the plagiarism if it's there, or point out why there's no plagiarism if it isn't there.
If they don't respond after a reasonable time, then the only thing left to do is submit the paper elsewhere.


UK Lecturer application: possible to refuse to answer "expected salary"? I am applying for faculty positions in multiple countries.  For all of the UK positions, it was necessary to fill out an online form, which always asks for my current salary, and often asks for my "expected salary".  All the UK job calls I have seen did state a salary range.

I find it very uncomfortable to tell them an "expected salary" and I worry that they will try to use this to exploit me.

Also, my current position was extended with a lower salary than what I was getting before (due to funding constraints). It was worth accepting this lower salary for a limited time, but I would not have accepted it long term. For this reason, I would prefer not to state my current salary either.

The application system requires me to fill out these fields, but of course I could always write something like "negotiable" which amounts to a refusal to tell.  I don't know if this is a good idea though.

In a UK context, what is the best way to proceed?  Just put in the average of their stated salary range?  Is it legal for them to require me to give this information?  What would be the consequences if I refuse?  Is this information used to choose one candidate over another?

I have seen "What should I state for "expected salary" in a tenure-track job application?" and I read the answers. I feel that they don't apply here, as the country and context make a difference.

(This does not really answer the question of whether one can refuse to answer "expected salary": rather it is a suggestion to help answer that question in a reasonable way, if you choose to do so.)

Something that may be useful to be aware of is the "Higher Education Pay Spine" which most (many? some?) UK institutions adhere to:

https://www.ucu.org.uk/he_singlepayspine

In my (admittedly limited) experience, Lecturers are typically appointed at a point somewhere around 36 on this scale. Others may have different information: please say if you do!

(For particular universities, a bit of internet searching will often show that they use a different scale, but the one linked above gives the general idea.)

Depending on your level of experience, you may wish to adjust what you ask for, but at least this gives you some context to help calibrate your response.


Where should citations be placed relative to punctuation (e.g., full stops and commas)? This question pops up every time I write an article (in the computer science domain), and I am unable to find a British English style-guide providing a proper answer.

Where should citations be placed within the sentence and its punctuation?
Where to put white space?

E.g., which options are preferable:

More coffee is always better. [XY]
More coffee is always better [XY].
More coffee is always better[XY].
More coffee is always better.[XY]
According to [XY], more coffee is always better.
According to XY[XY], more coffee is always better.
According to XY [XY], more coffee is always better.
According to XY, [XY] more coffee is always better.
According to XY,[XY] more coffee is always better.
According to XY, more coffee is always better [XY].
According to XY, more coffee is always better. [XY]

In the IEEE editor's style manual it says on page 34:

  References in Text: References need not be cited in the text. When they are, they appear on the line, in square
  brackets, inside the punctuation. Grammatically, they may be treated as if they were footnote numbers ...

I would interpret "inside the punctuation" as ruling out options 1, 4, and 11, even though the grammatical treatment of footnotes is not quite clear to me.

The Springer guide does not appear to comment on the question.

Any other hints / links / viable styles?

As others have mentioned, all sentences should be grammatically correct. The citation marker of the form [X] may play the role of a noun, or of silent word.

1, 4 and 11 are never correct - they put the citation into the next sentence, where it doesn't belong. Similarly, 8 and 9 put it into the wrong phrase of the sentence.

3, 6 and 9 combine words incorrectly. Spaces can't just be ignored.

That leaves 2, 5, 7 and 10. These are all used, except that the exact form of 7 will depend on the referencing style in use. You could have 'According to Smith [3]', but not 'According to Smith [Smith, 2017]', The latter would become 'According to Smith [2017]'. Also, for 10 you need to think about how long the second phrase is.


Is it plagiarism to use other people's phrases / formulations / wordings? Is it plagiarism if I use other peoples formulations and phrases? What if I do so massively? Or let's say, the structure or rough form of their essays?

(I think it should be, but I would like to know what most people think, leaving aside that it might be difficult to discover it when somebody just copies someone very roughly in form)

There's no hard-and-fast rule that if you copy 6 words, that's okay but 10 is not but, copying the substance of someone else's work, making only cosmetic changes is called "close paraphrasing" and would likely be considered plagiarism even if the source is cited.  If it was, as you say, "massive" or if it omitted any citations to the original work, then, without doubt, that would absolutely be considered plagiarism.  As an instructor, I know that if I discovered it in something a student submitted to me, I would certainly report it as suspected academic misconduct and I would expect my report to be sustained.

Here's an article you may find helpful:  Successful vs. unsuccessful paraphrases


Why is there less funding or scholarship opportunity for business students compared to other background students? If one compares the funding state between the business background students and the science, technology, engineering, math (STEM) background students in university, one will surely see much difference in the portion or extent of funding. Scholarship opportunities for business students are rare and small.  Why is this the case?

It may be useful to take a slightly larger perspective, rather than comparing just business vs. STEM.  While there is a great degree of variation around the world and from program to program, most higher-level degree funding can be clustered into three general categories:

Doctoral degrees in STEM fields are generally funded by universities or external agencies.
Terminal "professional" degrees, including MBA, MD, JD, DDS, etc. frequently expect students to be responsible for their own funding, often going deeply into debt to do so.
Doctoral degrees in humanities and liberal arts fields are in-between, where sometimes students are supported or partially supported and other times they are not.

There's a great deal of variation, of course.  For example, I believe that the education of medical doctors is supported by some nations (though I lack a reference at the moment).  Likewise, Masters degrees are sometimes considered a "professional degree" that students are expected to fund, while other times they are lumped in with STEM doctoral degrees and funded by the university or other sources.

So, why should this be the case?  It seems to me that a lot of this is simply independently developing markets:

STEM students are typically expected to contribute significantly to the investigation of science and engineering as part of their training, and since these contributions can be very valuable in those markets, it makes sense for external funding agencies to include students in their funding.
Professional degrees are often coupled with very high post-graduation salaries, while the training period is much more one-way, with the students spending most of their time learning rather than making novel (and readily fundable) contributions.
Humanities and liberal arts are also quite important societally, but they are not currently associated with markets flush with capital and an easy set of incentives to pour money into schools either during the program (as with STEM) or afterward (as with professional degrees).  As such, they have generally developed much more ad hoc and patchwork approaches to funding degrees.


How to tell pushy "advisors" to back off? TL;DR

What can a PhD student on a research stay abroad do about postdocs that are supposed to be collaborators but behave like "helicopter advisors"?

Background

A friend of mine is doing her PhD (fourth year) in Europe (in a STEM field) and she asked her PhD advisor for the possibility of a research stay abroad. So the advisor told her to contact some professor-acquaintances of his and one of them (at a very famous US university) had a project she could work on but no funds to pay her. She therefore applied for funding and stipends in her home country and managed to scrape up enough money to go and stay for some months. Half of this time has passed by now.

The Situation

She is working on said project together with two postdocs who will be co-authors on a possible paper resulting from it. The professor who invited her will of course also be a co-author but he is not very closely involved. The postdocs, on the other hand, seem to believe they need to track her every step and micro-manage her. All while being very demanding since they are looking for faculty positions. They will (both, sometimes one after the other, sometimes together) come to her office on an almost daily basis to be shown any progress she made. Also, they will schedule frequent meetings (in addition to the weekly group meeting) for her to report on what she has been doing and to give her tasks to complete. From what she's telling me, for her these meetings feel like it's two big guys against her. She tried to involve the professor in the meetings but all that did was make it feel like three big guys against her. She has also started working in the library and that has taken some pressure out since now the postdocs won't just come by and demand seeing her progress.

The Problem

However, the feeling of constantly being pushed and having to prove herself is starting to take a toll and I'm seriously worried about her mental well-being. She's not sleeping well, has considered just dropping everything and going home (something she usually never does), and sometimes she seems close to breaking down.

Now on the one hand I don't think the postdocs are doing this maliciously (they haven't reacted negatively to her starting to work in the library), it just seems to me like they have little experience in supervising students (which is odd, considering that they are looking for faculty positions) and interpersonal relations aren't really their strength. I mean not even an undergraduate student should be supervised so closely in my opinion, let alone someone reaching the end of their PhD who is funded from abroad and is basically a visiting collaborator. And on the other hand, to some degree, it's probably also her personality that's making this difficult since she really values working independently and maybe it's a cultural/language thing that has prevented her from being able to make that clear. But all this does not change the fact that something has to happen. Unfortunately, I wasn't really able to give her any good advice on how to make them understand that they're pushing too much and need to give her more freedom.

The Question

So what can I tell her to do when she asks the next time? How can she improve this situation without burning bridges?

It's hard to tell exactly what's happening here.

It does not seem unreasonable for collaborators to sync up daily. Ideally all three of you would be syncing up with each other, rather than just this student syncing up with her supervisors -- but since she is only staying for a short time and working on a single project, it is sort of natural that there is an imbalance. I wonder if the student is interpreting standard collaboration/teamwork as "pushing" and "having to prove herself".

But I can also see scenarios where the supervisors are really being overbearing and negatively affecting progress.

Either way, this is not the student's preferred work style, so I would consider trying to schedule some standing meetings. Maybe send a brief e-mail that says something like:

Hi guys,
I'd like to schedule some additional meetings where we could all sync up on the nuclear waste project. So far we've just been doing these discussions "on the fly", but I think it might be better for all of us if we had a set time for the three of us to sync up. Maybe Tuesdays and Thursdays at 1 PM? Please let me know.
Worried

They may react with

No, things are fine, you're doing great, just keep doing what you're doing

In which case, you can say bluntly:

I'd really prefer to have a set time -- that way I can prepare a summary of my progress/questions in advance, and won't have so many interruptions during the rest of the week. Could we give it a try?

If they still push back after that,  you may have to accept that this is how the group operates.


Is it a good practise to involve a child in a statement of purpose? Is it a good practise to involve a child in a statement of purpose to say how my point of view has changed since the birth?

No, the statement is about your motivation in doing research and about your research goals, not about your private life goals.

Having a child is undoubtedly a joyful event which can definitely change your perspective on work-life balance, but now that it's changed, simply state what  your current research goals and motivations are.


How do I know if I'm unprepared for my math PhD? I earned my B.A. in the U.S. but felt unprepared to go right into a PhD program due to the (extremely) limited math courses offered at my undergrad institution so I went into a masters program. I ended up doing really well (3.9GPA) and gained a lot of confidence and expanded my knowledge. A couple years later I decided I wanted to apply to programs for my PhD. I ended up selecting a foreign university where it is assumed you already possess a masters degree, which originally I though was great since it saved me a couple years of additional schooling that I though would be redundant. Now that I am about 6 months in however I am seriously questioning the quality of the master's program I was part of. It seems that others in the program are much more advanced than I am and I seem to struggle with everything, which is a brand new experience for me. I spend hours and hours spinning my wheels reading and trying to understand papers, feeling like I just don't know the background I need to. I feel as though after 6 months I have learned nothing and have wasted a lot of time on things that ultimately never became clear before I had to move on to the next task. I have somewhat discussed these concerns with my advisor but they seem confident that everything is fine.

I also find that now that I am here the project I am part of is much more applied than I had anticipated and I am unsure about if this will evolve to more closely match my interests over time or if this is just another indication of a poor match.

I am not sure what to do. Is this a normal experience? If it truly is not a fit for me at my current level of knowledge, what are my options?

Any advice is appreciated.

EDIT: I have not discussed this as bluntly with my advisor as I am speaking about it here, primarily because it is just over the last couple weeks that it has become much more problematic. I do intend to speak to them about this more explicitly at our next meeting.

The fact that your adviser thinks you're doing fine, in particular, suggests to me that you may be dealing with some impostor syndrome.

I think when most of us start out in PhD programs, we feel like everyone around us is doing much better.  Like they all belong here, but we don't.  This is usually accompanied with a feeling of "I had better keep my head down and stay quiet, so no one notices I don't belong here and kicks me out."

You don't say much about your conversation with your adviser.  Hopefully it was an honest conversation about why you're concerned.  As long as it was, consider trusting that they know what normal looks like.  You might also want to talk with some of your classmates more - you may be surprised to find that the ones who seem to be endlessly more successful than you are feeling identically.

PhD work is usually a whole new level of difficult, so it's not necessarily a warning sign that you feel like you have to study for hours to get anywhere.


What is important in choosing a Ph.D. program? I'm now choosing a Ph.D. program between two schools and am struggling a lot. Please let me know your thoughts and I'll greatly appreciate any help! The two universities are very similar in reputation and compensation.

School 1's lab: The professor is very nice and supportive. He would support a broad range of research topics and I have the freedom of choice. The students are very hardworking. They published 8 top conference papers last year.
However, the students in this group are from not good universities. And the professor is very young, his oldest Ph.D. student hasn't graduated yet, so I don't know the students' outcome. Also, the students are so hard-working that the work-life balance might be bad. Also, the professor doesn't have as many connections in my desired place of work.
School 2's lab: The students in this lab are all from top universities. The professor has advised many Ph.D.'s and all of them are going to great labs and universities now. The professor has a lot more citations and more connections in the country I want to work in the future.
However, the group only published 3 top conference papers last year. The professor is also not as committed to personally advising me.

The students in this lab are all from top universities

it is an irrelevant criterion for choosing a Ph.D. program for your

... not as interesting

Unless you don't mind being miserable throughout your P.hD, you shouldn't work in this lab if you don't have to, which seems to be the case.

... the professor is very young

I think it is a plus, instead of a negative.

the students are so hard-working that the work-life balance might be bad.

Just because they don't know how to balance their work-life with their life outside of work, it doesn't mean you won't be able to too.


It is plagiarism if my work is very similiar to something previously published? I am a PhD student in economics and making a mathematical model of some stuff in a subject of my interest.

While I was searching papers on Google Scholar, I found a PhD thesis written 5-6 years ago in my university, in which one of the chapters is somewhat very close to my stuff.

Just for an important detail, my idea is totally different and I think it is an interesting idea but the model is just slightly different from author's thesis and the solution method is very close.
In particular, the model framework that author used is a very commonly used framework in the literature but accidentally my solution method is very close to the author's method.

For sure without doubt, I will give the exact reference with the chapter and state where my idea is different from author's idea.

My question is: is this a plagiarism? How can I avoid any plagiarism problems? Should I contact the author in order to invite him to be my co-author in this case?

Your situation is not in any way plagiarism, but rather a common and ordinary case of independent reinvention.

There is no need to have the other person as a co-author or anything like that: just cite their model as related prior work, explain how yours is similar and different, and learn from it so that you can do the best you can with your own work.


Should chapter introduction and conclusion be included in the table of contents? In my thesis, I have five chapters, each of which includes sections and subsections. Each of the five chapters has an introduction and conclusion.

Should chapter introductions and conclusions be included in the table of contents?

If yes, should they be formatted as a first heading, like that of the APA style?

The overriding response here has to be "consult your supervisor, or any documentation that you university says on how they want things to be formatted".

However, if neither of those gives useful information, I would simply include them if you are including other headings at the same level. So if each chapter has multiple sections of which the introduction and conclusions are examples, I would format them the same as other sections and include all of the sections in the ToC.


Applying for assistant professor position, teaching statement required but I have no teaching experience I'm going to apply for an assistant professor position in a European university's campus in China. The problem is that I do not have any formal, class-based teaching experience while the job specification says that I need to teach four courses. The university also asks for a teaching statement. What shall I put in that statement?

Please advise and thanks in advance.

I do not have any formal, class-based teaching experience

The way you wrote this suggests that perhaps you have some informal teaching or tutoring experience.  If so, you can write about that.

You have years of experience observing teachers at work.  Think about what made the good ones effective, and what the bad ones did wrong.  You can use this analysis to create your draft teaching philosophy.

If you do not get this particular job, and you decide to continue applying for teaching jobs, then I suggest you get some teaching and tutoring experience under your belt as soon as possible.  It's okay to volunteer -- as long as you treat your volunteer teaching as seriously as you would treat a paid teaching or tutoring job.


Using Tech. Reports to 'protect' IP before presenting unpublished work in a conference The question is in the title, really. It is similar to other questions, such as:
How much information should I divulge about on-going unpublished research at a conference?

However, I am wondering if publishing an internal (i.e. non refereed, etc.) technical report actually protects me from any plagiarism if I should encounter one.

I know people sometimes publish in arxiv for this purpose, but I have two concerns: a. it is not customary for me to do that, and b. I am not sure it is considered 'unpublished' for the sake of publishing in a refereed journal later.

What do you think?

Thanks.

If you main concern is plagiarism, then any mechanism for creating a persistent, externally accessible, date-stamped copy of your work will clearly establish priority: arXiv and institution-specific technical memos each work just as well for this purpose.  When I was a graduate student at MIT, I used to use the CSAIL Technical Report series in exactly the way that you describe.  In computer science, at least, most publication venues seem to have no problem with this type of 'prior publication,' although it is not the same for other fields.

Note, however, that this will not actually stop you from being plagiarized, and may actually increase the chance, since it's another copy of your words out there online. It will, however, make it clear that they are your words and not those of the plagiarist.


Do I need to do revision on my accepted paper? I just received an email of my paper which was submitted to a conference.
The paper submission webpage has the following type of status:

  active (under review),  discuss,  withdrawn,  rejected,  minor
  revision,  major revision,  accepted,  no show,  published

The status of my paper shows "accepted". However, the reviewer of my papers have pointed out some shortcomings of my paper. (Personally, I think what the comments meant is that it would be nice to have things include in my paper). So the question is, do I need to make that adjustment for the "camera-ready" version? Is it true that only if the status says "minor revision" then you will have to adjust according to the reviewer's comment?

I would interpret "accepted" as "accepted in its current form", i.e. you do not have to make any changes.  But in order to be sure, ask the editor or program committee.

If you want to make changes based on the reviewer's comments, that is most likely possible; but again, you should ask the editor to make sure it is okay, and to find out when those changes would be due.


Did I screw myself out of graduate school? I graduated from a state school in 2009 with a 2.77 overall GPA. I technically should have graduated in 2008, but was only going part time, so I stretched it out and became a "super senior." I'll be the first to admit...I struggled with undiagnosed mental health and alcohol abuse issues for the majority of my early-mid 20s, so I simply didn't apply myself as much as I could have.

After I graduated, I had a really tough time finding a job in my field, so I decided to start taking some courses at a community college to see if perhaps I should try for a post-baccalaureate degree in another field. Many of which I did well in, with the exception of one F. THEN I made the asinine decision to go full time at a school about 1.5 hours away that I had to drive to. That lasted all of 2 months and by the time the semester had ended, I bailed...I didn't even take the time to withdraw. I simply allowed myself to fail out.

A decade later, I'm a marketing professional with 10 very successful years under my belt. I've worked some odd jobs to make ends meet, but I ended up excelling at a small nonprofit...then I moved into working as a contractor at a well-known retail store corporate office, now I work at and volunteer for the local branch at a nationally recognized nonprofit.

I'm married, own my home, have an amazing child, and I go to therapy regularly and take medication daily. I finally have my life together, but I've grown bored in my field and need something more in my professional life. I decided to look into graduate school awhile back and really took an interest in instructional design. I feel like my background, which includes a lot of graphic design, could prove to be quite useful in the field...and I have a genuine interest in helping people learn. I could go into more detail as to why I feel I'd be a good fit in the profession, but I'll save you all the elevator pitch. haha

The trouble I'm afraid of running into is my past...While I didn't give my all academically in my 20s, I KNOW I would as a person who is now in her mid-30s. I want better for myself and of course I want to show my daughter that you can do whatever you set your mind to. A lot of the programs I am looking at will accept a 2.8, others (like my Alma mater's) program will accept a 2.4 if you've been out of college more than 5 years, with 2 letters of recommendation. I have co-workers/supervisors/etc. that would be happy to write these letters for me... However, I'm scared the grades I received while screwing around at different schools while trying to figure out my life AFTER I got my bachelor's degree are really going to negatively impact my chances to move forward.

I guess I'm just wondering if anyone has any insight on whether or not grad school could be in my future with the history I have or it's simply a pipe dream at this point. Any thoughts would be greatly appreciated!!

If you intend to pursue a professional career and not a career in research sector, I would say "apply with no hesitation". Do not let your doubts and cognitive biases prevent you from accomplishing all you deserve.

For someone in your age, grades do not matter anymore. Even for someone straight out of college, I would say that grades do not really matter. It's more about your experience, characteristics, and capabilities. Based on your post, I think you could easily prove those criteria to your future employers.

Regarding a career in research sector, grades might matter. Grades represents your academic discipline and how you methodologically attack problem statements. So, you need to do very well in the course of your graduate studies.


Corresponding author published article without sending final proof to all authors, corrigendum My professor was the corresponding author of an article written by me as first author and one second co-author. Having the correspondence with the editor, the professor didn't give much information about the actual status of the article, allthough I asked several times for it.

Some months later, I got the notice that the article is now published. I never got a final proof of the article from the professor/ corresponding author and when I read through the published version, I was in huge shock as I noticed some formatting issues. However, the worst and most severe thing is, that one sentence was "corrected", stating the contrary of what it was supposed to mean. Obviously there is now a mistake in the article. This mistake doesn't affect the measurements results, but it is contradictful within the overall statement of the article.

I asked my professor about writing an erratum concerning this issue. The answer was, that he assumes this sentence not to be noticed and therefore, an erratum would be too much effort. I am feeling really bad being the first author of this paper, where I know about the mistake. Do you think I can ask the journal for an erratum without the consens of my professor?

Furthermore, I want to publish one more article of the work I have done, but the professor still claims the corresponding authorship. As my professor answers my emails only within months and as I don't have much trust in his actions anymore, I really don't know what to do. Does anybody have experience with such a situation?

--

EDIT: thank you for your answers, they are very helpful to me. The paper is a non-open access paper and already published in a printed issue of the journal. Furthermore, it is about a subject what I am not researching anymore, so there are no follow-up papers planned in the same journal.

I think my corresponding author will not be amused when I am writing the publisher as he already refused a corrigendum. You see this is a really tricky situation. What about writing a comment to the paper? I already saw remarks from third researchers concerning existing papers...maybe that could be a solution?

Many journals will still deal with the corresponding author for an erratum, and may not publish the erratum without trying to reach the corresponding author.  Plus, it is not a good idea to bypass collaborators and publish errata without the knowledge of all the authors as this could lead to inaccuracies in CVs.

The "easiest" way to deal with situations like this is to include in the follow up article a statement (where appropriate) of the type "where we take the opportunity to correct a misprint in Ref.1" or something along that line.

Also, if the article has been uploaded on a preprint server (such as arXiv) where updates are allowed, you can upload an updated corrected version.


Somebody made comments and suggestions on my drafts – can I be reasonably accused of plagiarism? I am a bachelor student. I have been working with a PhD on an article. So the article was supposed to be co-authored; however, he was mainly going to edit  my draft so it can be published. This is, the content of the article was actually my work, while the edition was going to be his part. I have e-mails with all the drafts I have sent to him until the final draft of the article. In these e-mails, one can see that he mainly suggested me to clarify some ideas or was trying to understand the ideas I was pointing out.

On the other hand, we have stopped working together. Thereby I sent him an e-mail, by recommendation of a professor, asking him if he had any inconvenience if I used my drafts for my bachelor thesis (in my country one first obtains the bachelor degree and then one must present the thesis). He answered that my drafts remain my work and that because of this I am free to use them.

The question which I would like to ask is if there would be any inconvenience if I wanted to publish this draft in a journal as long as it is actually my work. People have told me that as long as I have this e-mail where he is recognizing that my drafts remain my work, I would have no inconvenience, however, I wonder if this is enough for I did not ask him about using my drafts for publishing but just for my bachelor thesis.

I am wondering if he could accuse me of plagiarism if I would publish my work. I think that he could not do so because he has written to me that my drafts are my work and thereby I am free to use them. Besides this I have all the e-mails wherewith I could prove that the drafts are totally my production and that his contribution was mainly motivation and making me some suggestions or comments so that I can better clarify myself. Would that be enough in order I can publish my work without any fear of being accused of plagiarism?

Sending him an e-mail asking him directly is not really an option, for the relationship of work has gone deadly bad.

Based on what you said I have the impression that you are the main contributor to this work and he only had some editorial comments. Therefore, you publishing this work, cannot be classified as plagiarism. (If you think his contribution was sufficient for him to expect you to give him some credit (e.g. second author) then you have to be careful because it may cause further complications between you and him. Besides, it is your responsibility to make sure he gets the credit he deserves)

Most of the times people won't actually act against each other in situations like this. I remember a few years ago, I was stuck in a situation where someone decided to publish a team work with his name as the first author, while it was clear to everybody that he was not the major contributor. My adviser sat me down and told me to let it go (and I accepted because he had good reasons). What I'm trying to say is that in cases like this your supervisor would usually mediate and smooths things out before it gets serious.

However, I think the chances of him even trying to accuse you of plagiarism are very slim. But even so, if you publish this work before him, he needs to have enough evidence that he had major contribution to the work. I assume that this is not the case and it is clear from the emails that were sent to you.

I suggest you to simply let your adviser know that you will try to publish this work and don't worry about the PhD student.


Where to include contact details in math paper I recently submitted a paper to a math journal with standard latex formatting, but they sent an email back saying that the contact details for the corresponding author should be in the document itself. Where exactly does this mean? On the title page next to my name?

Right now it looks like this:

Title

First name Last name

April 14, 2014

Abstract

The rest of the paper then follows
...

References

[1] reference...

Where exactly should I include my email address?
I am the only author of this paper.

This depends entirely on the journal's style. They should provide a LaTeX class or template that explicitly identifies how to include the corresponding author's contact info, or if not that, a web page with instructions on how to include contact information. Without knowing which journal you're talking about, I don't think I can say anything more than that.


Can I work as a software engineer and be a PhD student? I'm a master student, my master's background is about IT, signal processing, and Telecommunications. It's a "research master", which means that we're trained more to do research than be an IT engineers/specialists.

I've made my choice because I want to do research, but It is also important for me to work after my masters graduation, some of my professors always say that it's very difficult, even impossible to do those two things together. So I'd like some more advice. Here are my questions:

Is it practically possible to do research and work?
Is it a good idea to work for a year or two after my masters, and start a PhD after that?
What kind of internships can I do, and how long should they be, so I can apply to IT companies?

PS: I've some background ans skills in Java technologies, software design, web development, and basic knowledge in networks.

I did combine PhD and work for 4 years, so, theoretically - yes, it's possible. But I didn't like the process because I wasn't fully invested in either activity. It also significantly delayed my defense. It depends on how productive you are. At times you will be facing certain deadlines and will be feeling torn between two major activities.

I think you should go ahead with PhD if you are serious about it. It will take some 3-6 years of your time, so why to postpone it? I think it's totally possible to get internships at summer time and you may have to develop software as a part of your research, so you'll be practicing your skills.

You can also consider free-lance work so that you have more control over your time.


delayed final manuscript submission We have submitted one article to a journal. The editor gave us two weeks for the final manuscript submission. However, he also informed us if more time is absolutely necessary then he can allow us some more time. We have sent him two emails asking some more time. But, he never responded. What should we do now? If I take some more time, will my article be automatically considered as a new one (in the email, he has written so)? Or should I send him some more mails until he replies.

These things are almost always at the discretion of the editor. If you notified him that you need more time, you are probably in the clear. But even if for some reason the manuscript database of the journal decides that you took more than 2 weeks and forces you to submit your revised paper as a new manuscript, the editor will still send it to the previous reviewers and treat it as if it was a revision. That's because any other course simply makes no sense from the perspective of the editor.

In other words, the worst that can happen is that the date of submission on the final, published version of the paper is the date when you submitted the revised version, rather than the original. There are likely very few cases where that actually makes a difference.

In summary: Don't worry too much about this technicality.


Co-authorship just because a Professor provides me the employment? I am a postdoc at a European University. However, I am planning to quit my postdoc in a month or so since the research environment and the city life is not to me liking.

Also, I work with a Professor who is very polite, but also very busy with meetings. My salary comes from the project he administers, so he is the boss of the organization and the project.

For the past four months I have been working on a problem day and night including weekends as I found the problem very interesting and challenging. The theoretical part of the work is complete. It is a "complete" solution. He had NO contribution at all in this. Not even a single email exchange. He is too busy with meetings all the time. He is in the department twice a week for two to three hours at a time. I am also managing his master student as he has no time.

He is definitely polite and nice though, but I have not received any input from him other than giving me printed research papers. But he always asked me to give him the PDFs of lengthy derivations which I did. But I am dealing with analytical/numerical Navier-Stokes equation and its variations, so you can imagine how much terse that is. He has the entire theory now with him from my work. He may have been a good researcher in the past but no contribution to this work. And he had no proper publication in the work that I am doing so I am not sure how much he can contribute in writing the paper.

Now remains the numerical part which I believe I can do in next 2/3 weeks. And I have the ability to write the paper by myself when I have the numerical solution.

I talked to him and asked if I can work for him based in another city. He said if it is a week visit, that is fine, but not otherwise. He said it clearly that "I will not pay you to work somewhere else."

I still have a cordial relationship with him. No worries on that part. So, I am going to leave the place and the position in a month or two for sure.

So, he gains co-authorship just because he has the authority to provide employment? What should I do? Please help. I could have continued to live in the city though it was little boring for me, provided I was able to get inputs from my collaborator, or if he had given me necessary freedom to collaborate with other researchers, which he hasn't.

Update 10th June, I have resigned now. This problem has evolved into a new stage. Please post your replies there:

Gifting co-authorship if the topic of research was suggested by my boss?

and

Acknowledgment of funding and adding an affiliation in exchange of permission to use experimental data?

This is a form of gift authorship. The worst form, if he imposes it on you. I know some people would think otherwise, but my last supervisor, who was a big name in his field never signed papers he had no contribution on. And this was despite of the fact that he was the big grant writer and winner of the group.

It's hard to tell what to do. In my case, I used to simply do what I was told by the boss. Only I never had such dilemmas. But, I had a few friends who were in the same situation as you. When they refused co-authorship, their supervisors got angry. I work with one of these supervisors at this time. The guy went around and told everyone my friend "stole" his idea. Nevermind that dude had no ideas to begin with. The other guy, wrote a negative recommendation letter for my other friend who lost a very tempting postdoc offer over it.

My recommendation is to stall until you leave the group. Until then you fix all the details you need to fix for the paper and find out if your boss plans to contribute anything else to it. If it wasn't his idea and had so little involvement in it, once you are gone, you can publish without permission. As a courtesy, you can tell your superviser, after you're gone, that you are thinking of including him in the paper if he has time to make a contribution you think would be useful and within his capabilities. If not, include him in your Acknowledgements  section.

Edit: backup your correspondence with him (emails). You may need them if he's the kind of guy who gets upset and writes your editor that you "stole" ideas from him. Hopefully, it won't be the case.


Research proposal for a pre-defined PhD topic A school that I am applying has a list of available topics, along with their descriptions, which I can choose from. I already select one topic which matches my interest and background, I also contact a professor who will supervise on that topic and he encourages me to go for it. However, as the application process, I need to write a research proposal. It makes me confused as the topic and research description are already defined. I can add some comments on the topic and then relate my background to it, but it will be a personal statement instead of research proposal. So, I wonder in other universities, what students are expected to write in their research proposals when they select a pre-defined topics.

I would ask the professor who encouraged you to apply what the best strategy is.

In any case, a good idea is to take the topic proposed in the list you mention and write about that. Make it your own. Try to develop your own approach to the topic. Elaborate more on what needs to be done. Explore some related work a find out what has been written. This will help demonstrate that you have what it takes to be a (top) PhD student.

Avoid simply writing a personal statement on top of the research proposal. They probably want to see how you think about the research topic and would approach it.

If possible, get the professor to help you out. Not by doing the writing, but by providing comments and possibly related work. (Note that professors are busy, so s/he may not have time to do this.)


Do i really need a masters degree for data science / machine learning ? Applied Maths background I am a senior student in a 5-year integrated Masters degree in Applied Mathematics and i have selected a specialization in Mathematics for Computer Science(Data structures,Algorithms and Complexity,Graph Theory etc.). I have a good understanding of Statistics, Probabilites etc. and decent knowledge of Python,R,Java,SQL,PHP. Last year i had a class of "Data Analysis using R" and i loved it so i was thinking of following a career in data science and machine learning and therefore doing an Msc in this field.

Unfortunately i don't have good grades and therefore it is pretty hard to make it for a Master's degree in a good university,also i don't think i could make it for this year applications so that means i will have to wait another year until i can apply again.

So i was wondering if i realy need a masters degree for a junior level job in this field, since i think i am half way there with my background, or if i could make it by studying on my own for some months(or a mooc) about ML,Big Data etc ?

I work as a data scientist. We hire many people with a bachelor's degree in computer science, statistics, applied math, etc. Having a master's degree is better. If you have a master's degree in applied math, most data science jobs will be happy to look at you.

Be warned of course that there are various levels of 'data science' positions out there. Some of our junior employees literally just sit and query data bases for us all day. Or they are responsible to create nice looking images in Tableau. (Which has very little to do with "real" data science). I personally would find it to be mind numbing work. But it pays the bills for them, so it is what it is. To get onto the teams that do real research, we often require a graduate degree and some formalized abilities in machine learning.

Compile a portfolio of your strongest projects.

Being able to demonstrate some projects in ML you have worked on can go a long way. The more examples of independent projects in ML and data science that you have done, the better. Projects that demonstrate an understanding of what is going on beneath the surface are the best. (Anyone with basic R skills can run a RandomForest analysis. Being able to explain how you changed your parameters to optimize your model is another story).

I will comment on your grades here. For junior positions, grades honestly do not matter for the most part. All we would care about is if you can do the work. For higher positions, someone with a mediocre GPA is not going to be looked at as strongly. Most of us excelled in school. Much of our work requires study and applied learning. Applicants with mediocre GPAs usually do not have the specific study aptitudes we want. If your GPA is lower than about a 3.7, and you want to work into senior positions, be prepared to really demonstrate your value with a strong project portfolio.

One piece of advice on applying for junior level positions. Data science positions tend to fall into two categories: data analyst and data researcher. There is not a lot of fluidity between the two tracks. People who start out as analysts tend to get stuck there long term. If you want to get into machine learning and big data, avoid applying to data analyst jobs.

One other thing I will say: Avoid paying for a data science "boot camp" or the like. At least at my place of employment, we tend to place very little weight onto such things. I see applicants who have a BA in Classical Greek (very interesting subject, but very little job market) who have gone to a coding boot camp and expect that we will bring them in as a ML researcher or something. It does not work like that.


Is it realistic to deal with a huge undocumented code base for master's project? I'm currently pursuing a Master's degree in a STEM field and working on a thesis. For my master's thesis, my advisor suggested I expand the code of the group's  software and add new features to it. However, is very large (some files are thousands of lines long) and hard to read. It consists of many different files  and there are hardly any comments that explain what the functions do,  the meaning of the variables, etc. There's no documentation that  explains what the functions/classes do. It seems like whenever I am focusing on  what a function does, there's multiple functions/variables in it that  are defined in another file and those functions/classes themselves are hundreds  of lines long

While my advisor has mentioned he is open to helping me with whatever  questions I have, most of the problems I'm having are related to the  code, since it's so gigantic and I don't even know where to begin to ask questions. But the prof doesn't know much about the  code, so I have to ask the postdoc whenever I have questions about the  code. However, the postdoc doesn't even know alot of the code (he knows c++, but most of the code was written by a former postdoc), and  told me I should email that former postdoc to  answer my questions about the code.

I've spoken to some people about this, and they've said this is a very bad situation. Should I leave this group and join a new one, even if it means I  have to delay my graduation by an extra semester(assuming that I will graduate on-time if I  continue with this current group)?

It's been a month since I joined this group and I hope to finish by next spring, but I don't know how realistic that goal is.

I would be very wary of taking on this thesis topic.  There's a huge amount of programming effort here, but you're not trying to get an MS in software engineering, so this will necessarily be a project in which you spend most of your time doing work that is actually outside of your discipline.  Furthermore, there's a risk that either you'll never be able to understand various aspects of the code or that you'll misunderstand things and then make changes that break the code.


On answering a question that no one has asked In historical research I came across a novel question and, after investing time in it, I have an answer. This helps my original project, but the explanation to the novel question is so substantial that I would like to  publish it separately.

It is well known that X did Y. The thesis of the proposed article is that Z explains X's decision. Unfortunately, I can't point to any publication that asks why X did Y, and Z has no obvious relevance to present day issues.

Why should reviewers want to see an article addressing an unknown problem? What can I do to justify the project?

Well, this is the core of research: You ask questions due to your knowledge and expertise that others probably cannot ask. And then you publish your results. There is no general need to justify the question as long as your question makes sense. It will be sufficient if you describe how you arrived at that question. You certainly have read some literature for that, so you will also cite some sources.

And reviewers will be happy with it if your methods are fine, your results are plausible etc.


Any advice on the Erasmus experience What are the advantages and disadvantages of taking an Erasmus exchange semester abroad, and will it have an effect when it comes to finding a job?

Going for an Erasmus, an EU student exchange progamme, may be a plus, not only "the obvious cultural advantages" (like learning a language better than in the lab / during holidays) if you watch out for similarities and differences in your field, comparing your home and your hosting institution.  Hopefully you will recognize both the odds and the benefits of different teaching / learning cultures and mint benefit for you.  Use it as a chance to learn differently, including different topics than at home.

If possible, look for integrated programmes (like the ones by the French-German University, for example), where two institutions are partners who mutally agreed on the curricula. Otherwise upon your return, if there is no recognized equivalent of what you did at your host institution at your home institution, you may have to attend lectures and lab classes a twice and hence, delay completion of your studies.

Going for an Erasmus is a potential obstacle, be prepared some won't understand you this well anymore, as your horizon of experiences may diverge from theirs.  At your host institution, at least at the beginning, you will be a foreigner; at your home institution you may be earmarked as "thinking different" or "s/he once left the boat".  You may somewhat "tainted" like a foreigner, or become a pacemaker returning with new ideas.

Is it better for getting a job?  Again, it depends on the where you want to go, if the potential employer recognizes, appreciates and supports the benefits of someone who left the nutshell.   Some do their studies including a PhD and beyond, promptly find a job, never even thinking about getting into an Erasmus; all staying in the same city.  Some face the difficulties of "you no longer think/act as we expected as a true/pure (insert your nationality) physician / biologist / .... would do."


Effective use of extra time during a PhD I am a PhD student in mathematics starting my third year with the goal of a tenure track position at an R1 university. I believe I have enough research completed that I could graduate this year if I chose to, however my funding situation allows me to stay in my program for up to 6 years fully funded and with little teaching obligation (I do have the opportunity to teach a full course over the summer and plan to do so). I am currently planning to stay for all 6 years, unless I receive a very good offer in my 5th year. I have somewhat different taste in problems from my advisor, so I am currently working on becoming a more independent researcher.

My question is on how to best take advantage of the remaining years of my degree. Is there anything more subtle than "do more research"? What can I do to prepare myself for a postdoc or otherwise get ahead? Are there things that can be done as a graduate student in this situation that cannot easily be done as a postdoc or that are much better to start earlier?

Very interesting question, the answer of course depends on you and your preference. A few pieces from a Y3 postdoc...

Advice 1: Think of a skill that you feel as your biggest weakness. If possible, try working on improving it. This can be a management workshop, a presentation class, whatever. As a postdoc, having a well-rounded skillset is going to be useful.
Advice 2: Think of an area adjacent to yours which you considered to learn about, and then try to take an online course or something like that for it. Having broader overview helps a bunch.
Advice 3: Present your work to others. Write a bunch of profs of interest that you'd like to visit their lab and give a lecture about your PhD topic. But also, consider giving public-oriented "outreach" lectures, so that interested general public knows what's happening in your field. One feels this to be  important, given we're usully paid from their taxes.
Start writing that book that you always wanted ;)


Can I submit my application before fall semester grades are released? I'm applying to grad schools, and my fall semester grades will be out before the deadline. I know my GPA is going to fall, so I'm thinking of submitting my applications without those grades. Is it acceptable to submit my application when the grades aren't out yet, even though they will be out before the deadline for the application or when the deadlines are in January, that means they expect to see the grades for the Fall semester? (They'll be out in a few days actually.)

You certainly can do so—many students must, given that the deadline at many schools is before the fall semester is complete.

However, note that any school that accepts you will want to see your finished transcript before allowing you to enroll. Significant plummets in grade (going from an A average to a C average in your final year, for instance) will raise eyebrows, and potentially cause some schools to withdraw offers.


Should I ask my advisor to please pretend that he is happy with me until the end of my contract? I am a post-doc in the UK. Today, In online lab meeting, my boss said that the name of my two postdocs are in two different grants and our technician is in both but he did not take me into account as his postdoc. He then asked me, are you going back to your country? I told no please don't kill me and everyone simply laughed. I am in 18th months of my employment as a postdoc with him and my contact is until December 2021. His today statement has been a huge pain by which I have lost myself totally. I admit that after few months of my employment, from his body language and all reactions I realized that he is not happy with me, he is not taking me seriously, he is not eager to listen to me...

Do you think it is logical if I ask a private chat with him and request him at least he please pretend that he is happy with me until the end of my contract? because by each lab meeting I become such a frustrated and desperate that I have found myself in a pure darkness of hopelessness. In the morning turning the Teams app to see my colleagues who they are all happy gives me a feeling of death. I can not change myself, I can not increase my intelligence, seeing them when boss cherish them makes me hate myself and all my day like a nightmare

Update

From all of your comments I can say, my boss is not happy with me. I have started to find a job, I hope I find somewhere needs me. This job is really cruel and you would be eliminated from the system if you are not good enough. Thank you everyone for giving the time to help me.

I would ask for a meeting, but not for the reason you suggest. You may be misinterpreting messages. I'd ask him if he was pleased or not with your work and what you can do to improve it in his opinion. If it seems like a good idea when you are having such a conversation mention that you think he is displeased and don't understand why.

Don't overthink that they laughed at your comment. It was a somewhat strange thing to say even if you were panicked.

And you should certainly talk to a personal health counselor about your emotional state. That isn't healthy, but professionals can help you deal with it.


Following up with a potential supervisor I have been applying to join up for an MSc in Universities in Canada. One particular faculty member conditionally expressed his interest in being my supervisor. The dept is considering applications and I have mailed them regarding the timeline of when a decision would be made with no response. Meanwhile, I mailed the potential supervisor with a change in circumstance and he said thank you for keeping in touch. It has been 15 days since then and I am wondering if I should mail him just to show that I am still interested in joining his lab. I am, however, unsure as to if I should mail him and if so, what do I say. Nothing new has happened to report and I don't know any projects that he is currently working on. Please advise.

Your potential supervisor, like pretty much everyone else, expects useful professional correspondence. By useful I mean that they expect to learn something new from it. If no event has taken place that would warrant a change of state, your potential supervisor has no reason to assume that your position has changed. Therefore, there is no need to send any email, that would confirm something they already know.

Two weeks is by no means a long time for an admission process status update, so, that needn't worry you. However, if the process would take a disproportionate amount of time (how much depends on local factors), I would consider emailing the professor again. But that is a change of the circumstances as explained above.

Another case in which I would consider contacting the person is a reminder. That is usually the case when you expect them something to do or if you got no response the first time. You state that you already communicated a change of state and that they acknowledged it by thanking you.

Bottom line, if you have nothing new to report, nothing to inquire and no need to remind the recipient of anything, there is no need to send an email.


What is "salami slicing"? Does it preclude presenting similar papers on a similar topic at multiple conferences? What is meant by "salami slicing" ?   I see that a few researchers present papers at multiple conferences with a very similar theme or topic, but was not sure if this was permissible.  My own research could fit multiple conferences, even if the topic at each of these papers would be virtually the same.

Salami slicing normally refers to a different practice; that of taking a result and slicing it up into several smaller results with the intent of getting multiple publications. Technically all of the resulting papers are different, but less significant than if all were presented together in a single paper (or smaller number of papers).
It doesn't really have to do with "similarity" as such. But some conferences would frown on "virtually the same" paper at their conference.
But it depends. If the purpose of a conference is simply to broaden the audience of a result then there may be no issue. But conferences in some fields, such as CS, are primary publication venues and the proceedings have the same weight (or more) than journal publication.
In the latter case you have issues about self plagiarism and multiple publication, both of which are best avoided.
But I know some people who give similar talks at multiple conferences (often by invitation) and there is no issue, since their talk isn't intended to represent new results. So, a bit subtle, depending on the conference.
So, while your idea may not be technically "salami slicing" you still need to evaluate its appropriateness.


When to upload preprint (or abstract) to online repository? I know that it depends on where I publish whether I am allowed to upload my paper to an online repository like ResearchGate (cf. here).

The question is, however, when I would upload the paper.

Can I upload the abstract before the actual publication?
Can I upload the paper (e.g. preprint) before the actual publication?
Or should I wait with both until the paper has actually been published?

For example, Springer only allows you to make your work publicly available 12 months after official publication or later. The policiy does not say anything about abstracts, however.

Since I think that making the abstract available beforehand is good publicity for my paper, I´m interested in

common practice -- when do you upload what?
legal restrictions.

Springer's self-archiving policy states:

  By signing the Copyright Transfer Statement you [may] deposit ... the article in any repository, provided it is only made publicly available 12 months after official publication or later.

Thus, you may deposit the article in any repository before signing the Copyright Transfer Statement.


Finding papers that report results on a dataset I am doing a literature study, and I would like to identify published research papers that report results on Reuters dataset RCV1-v2 (as comprehensively as could possibly be expected). The results should preferably be comparable (i.e. use the exact same subset of this dataset, e.g., some tend to use only a smaller subset)

How should one approach this problem?

So far, this is what I did:

The dataset was introduced in this paper: Rcv1: A new benchmark collection for text categorization research.

I went to scholar.google.com, found the paper, clicked on "citations", then marked "search within citation", and used keywords such as "results", "comparison", "evaluation". Is there a better way?

There are 1651 citations (according to Google scholar...), at what point should one feel reasonable comfortable that one has (comprehensively) identified the papers which have reported (comparable) results on this dataset?

The goal of the literature study is to motivate my choice of method (I want to inform myself of what methods have been applied, and how they compare to each other).

In principle, I think your approach is good, but I have a few suggestions to make your search hopefully more feasible:

Rather than using Google Scholar, I would use a more focused scholarly database that also tracks citations. In general, Web of Science is best for these purposes, but since this particular article is available on the ACM Digital Library, then that might possibly be a better choice. If you're interested in computer science and related literature, then ACM Digital Library is the way to go; if you want to be more broad in your range of disciplines, then I would go with Web of Science.
There are two advantages to using a more focused database rather than Google scholar:

Practically speaking, you have much fewer citations to deal with, and so the task is more feasible. Yet, these focused databases have fairly stringent quality standards, and so although most citations are not included, those that are are widely recognized as high quality. It is a compromise for the sake of feasibility, without meaningfully sacrificing quality. To me, this works for your particular purpose because surveying methods doesn't require an exhaustive search; a comprehensive search is sufficient.
These focused databases usually have much more fine-tuned search options than Google Scholar (e.g. abstract only, keywords, etc.). Thus, you can more precisely focus your search to exclude the articles that you consider irrelevant. (The reason that Google Scholar is not as fine-tuned obviously has nothing to do with their engineers' capabilities; I guess it's probably a matter of copyright licensing to archive and search the journal databases. Google Scholar is free, whereas the others have to pay the journals, so I guess they place a limit on what they consider "fair use" for Google. This is my speculation; I'm not certain.)


Terminology for lecturing modes (for CV) In the country I did my PhD in, at a lot of courses there are lectures by a professor covering theory, and then lectures by a PhD student which cover exercises, examples, clarifications, etc. Those are lectures which require preparation, standing in front of a full class, just like the "main" lectures. My question is, how should I refer to it in my CV. Maybe if I write "Teaching Assistant", in the US it might be understood as something with less weight than what I described?

Thanks

I am a teaching assistant in the US and I do this type of classes. They are called "review sessions", "recitations" or "discussions", depending on the department and the institution. Following professors'  advice, in my academic CV, in my "teaching experience" section, I list each class I have TAed for and I write a short sentence specifying if I only graded assignments or I also held review sessions or designed materials or something else.


Can I be a researcher at a UK university without having teaching duties? I have looked at Geology jobs but only oil and gas or engineering comes up which I have no interest in. I'd rather do something more academic.

I'm currently a student in a UK university and am hoping to become a researcher at a UK university in the future. Do the universities employ researchers who don't need to fulfil a teaching post?

Such roles definitely exist in U.K. universities. For example the University of Southampton has 4 different types of Professorial Grade post, which depend on the balance of education, research, and 'enterprise' which a member of staff might undertake. It's possible to have a 100% research appointment under this scheme.

However, I don't know if every field uses all the types of post. I could believe that the more specialised research only posts are only available in disciplines where these is a reasonable expectation of very high value grants.

I'd expect similar arrangements to exist in other universities in the U.K.

However, relying on 100% research is a bit of a  risk - with a role entirely reliant on outside funding you never know when those funds might dry up. Some teaching or service component, paid not out of grant funds, could add a bit of consistency and predictability to a role.


Are undergraduate journals a good choice for publishing papers? I am 18 years old (high school undergraduate) but I have had my first scientific paper published by the age of 16 to a regular (non-undergraduate) journal. However, I am preparing some papers for publication related to Computer Vision, Computational Geometry and Scientific Software and, through a scholastic search at the Internet I found that there are some undergraduate journals that are often more flexible to what is being published since they contain undergraduate articles, as well as in the reviewing process.

So, generically speaking, are undergraduate journals a good choice for publications even for someone that has already published some of his work to regular journals? I know that it heavily depends on the content and the significance of the contributions being discussed in the paper but do undergraduate journals trigger the interest from other researchers to cite work and get informed from them?

Don't publish in weird journals

Work to publish in the mainstream journals, despite their fickle biases and sometimes burdensome cost. Fields often have a pecking order of journals and the journal in which an article is published can change the perception of an article. Journals such as the national high school journal of science may be well-intentioned, but seem to provide a way for people to start worrying earlier and earlier about publishing.

It is premature for you to worry about your publication profile.

You've already published one paper at 16-- that's great. You are ahead of the curve. Graduate programs look for undergraduates to have published. Colleges look for evidence of potential. In the two labs I've worked in, the PI evaluates prospective high school students and undergraduates based on a letter of recommendations and a brief talk with the prospective student. Incremental publications in third tier journals may be a necessary part of the tenure slog, but you have the time now to just learn science and decide whether you want to pursue it as a career. Worrying about publications in high school is putting the cart before the horse.


How to deal with a micromanaging supervisor? I am doing my PostDoc with a reputable professor, who achieved a lot in our research area. I really learnt a lot of things from him, but the problem is that I am uncomfortable with his supervision.

He is kind of person who wants to show that they are open and accept different opinion but when we start discussing he does not accept the other opinion and very often justifies his opinion by "If I was a reviewer I would reject ....". After a few discussions with him, I just say you are right. He has also an annoying attitude; he points out what he does not like directly (which is not always from the aspect of wrong and true) and if he believes something is wrong, he shouts and says it is wrong (even if you are presenting). At work, he has opinions about everything and I should apply (not because it is his opinions but because we discussed and his opinion is always true).

When we write something together based on one line idea, of course, I write what I think is right, but he just gives the feeling that you are doing something stupid and says it does not work (it is still an idea). Overall, I am allowed neither to do mistakes, to disagree with him nor to give wrong assumptions.
-I would prefer that he gives his opinion by saying I prefer this idea better and pointing out a wrong assumption by saying I don't think this works. Evaluating me (monthly for example) instead of just saying directly you are wrong (because most of the time the mistake does not affect the work). -

Since I started working with him, some colleagues just left because not agreeing with him (I don't know the details) but he told me that because they were not able to do what I asked them for. Also, during our meetings, he made so many people cry, especially girls because of his way of criticism.

We are now writing a proposal together and he asked me to write about his ideas, but he does not like that I am just doing what was assigned to me and not taking lead and drive the proposal. Actually, I don't feel that I am allowed to do thing by myself because he is pointing out everything so I just wait for his orders.

Before, I just accepted this fact and to deliver the work and accomplish his orders until I finish my PostDoc contract, but now he behaves as a micromanager and wants me to take lead. The two things don't match in my opinion.

I don't know how to deal with this situation.

It is a difficult situation but you can try the following:

Tell your supervisor the following:

  I would prefer that he gives his opinion by saying I prefer this idea better and pointing out a wrong assumption by saying I don't think this works. Evaluating me (monthly for example) instead of just saying directly you are wrong (because most of the time the mistake does not affect the work). -

It is not guaranteed to work —  if he's certain he's always right, he's probably certain that he's right in how he does the supervision. But it may hive him the food for thought and eventually lead him to adapt to your needs.

Take a more leading role in collaboration. He explicitly expects you to do it. Yes, you will probably be criticised for your mistakes, but if you manage to process this feedback constructively, you will get  a lot of useful knowledge and experience.

  I don't feel that I am allowed to do thing by myself because he is pointing out everything so I just wait for his orders.

Don't wait for his orders. He explicitly wants you to try and fail and receive his feedback on it and try again. This is his supervision method. It's annoying but it's not the worst. Maybe, ask him also to note and appreciate good things about your proposals when he sees them.

Micromanaging requires a lot of time, effort and thought. It's not an easy or pleasant strategy. Being control freak is not fun. PI's are pushed into it often because they:

are responsible for large and complex projects
do not have time to do all the work personally and have to rely on postdocs
do not receive the expected outcome from their postdocs — for various reasons postdocs may waste project time and funds and achieve nothing.

There is a delicate balance to strike between developing a postdoc as an independent researcher (i.e. allow them to take lead, try and fail), and achieving project goals (i.e. get excellent results and produce top-level publications). These two goals contradict each other, and any PI is under a pressure to deliver both. This may lead to the conflict you describe as:

  he behaves as a micromanager and wants me to take lead. The two things don't match in my opinion.

Unfortunately, this is a direct consequence of modern funding system and culture of success in academia.

I disagree with another answer suggesting to "blame the professor". My advice is to try to help your professor.


Student Travel Grant = Volunteering; is it worth it? I have a paper accepted to a conference and my adviser is willing to fully fund the trip.

However, I am also eligible to apply for a "Student Travel Grant" (being a student author).

Pros of getting the travel grant:

saves adviser grant money
goes on my resume

Cons:

i would have to volunteer and possibly spend half of each day with tasks at hand

I am not sure whether it's worth applying for the travel grant and helping at the conference, as opposed to just going there.

For those of you who have been in this or similar situations before, what would you advise?

UPDATE: I learned that the grant covers almost half of my total trip cost, and that the volunteering time is around 1/4 of the total conference duration, which is good; Hence, I have applied for it. Thanks everyone for your help.

Based on my own experience, I would definitely recommend applying for the travel grant!

The pros you have mentioned are fairly substantial. Regarding the con: I have never found any conference volunteer job to be at all onerous*, and usually they have been fun and/or valuable.

For example, here are some volunteer jobs I have had:

Volunteering at the registration desk

If I have this job, I get to meet all the attendees as they come in. Usually, when I first sit down at the registration table, I flip through the badges to see who is registered, and make a plan for who I want to meet. Then, if those people come in while I am "on duty" and they are not in a rush, I can strike up a conversation.

By doing this, I've been able to have some really "spontaneous" talks with important people in my field who I wouldn't have had much of an opening to meet otherwise.

I've never been asked to do this job for more than a couple of hours at any given conference, so I didn't feel like I was missing out. If this is my volunteer job, I can usually arrange with the other volunteers so I am "on duty" during a time when there are no sessions I'm interested in anyways.

Taking minutes in meetings

Another time, I was a student volunteer at a conference that also hosts its sponsoring SIG's annual business meeting, and my job was to take minutes in this meeting. I got to listen in while all the big shots in the SIG talked about what they really think of the state of the subfield, the quality of the conference, the direction they'd like to see things go in, etc.

Also, the meeting was in the evening and there were no conference sessions going on, so I didn't miss anything while doing this (except maybe a nap).

Mic shuttler, running the 1-minute madness session

Some volunteer jobs take place inside the conference sessions themselves, so you don't miss out on anything while doing these jobs.

For example, I've been assigned to be the person that carries the mic around to people who have questions during the Q&A after each talk.

I've also been part of keeping the 1-minute madness session (where poster/demo presenters get up one after another and speak for one minute about their poster) on time. The student volunteer coordinator described this job as follows:

  1 person in charge of lining up presenters in the correct order, 1 person in charge of advancing the presentations, and about 5 are responsible for throwing the presenter with crumpled paper balls at the 56th second to get her/him off the stage.

(I didn't have to throw any paper balls.)

* YMMV. At a large, well-organized conference there will be lots of volunteers, you can choose which task you prefer, and no one student has to do too much work. At a smaller conference, things may be different.


When to start contacting possible PhD supervisors (Europe)? Currently I'm a master in statistics student in a European country and I'm planning to graduate in June 2021. During my master's thesis, I became interested in doing research and therefore, I have decided to pursue a PhD. I've already started looking for PhD vacancies at different universities but they all seem to look for someone who can start immediately. I've also made a list of potential supervisors and research groups that I want to contact, since sometimes not all available PhD positions are mentioned on the websites of the universities. My question now is: when should I start contacting potential supervisors? I'm afraid to contact them too early and that they haven't got time yet to look for funding or projects.
I'm mostly interested in doing a PhD in The Netherlands, Belgium, Germany or France.

Can't give you a generic answer, but here is my particular situation: I am an assistant professor in the Netherlands. Contacting me to pursue a PhD is futile, since I have no funding at the moment to host PhDs. If such funding would become available (which can happen at any time; there is no rhythm to this), positions will appear on my university's vancancies page. You are most welcome to apply to any such positions, but contacting me beforehand is not necessary.
In all of the Netherlands, PhD students are viewed as university employees. Therefore, a PhD vacancy is not a matter of student admission, but a matter of employee hiring. As a consequence, the human resources department will manage the bulk of the procedure; although professors definitely get to choose people that would be a good topical match, the hiring process is much more centralized than in some other countries. In Germany, situations vary: at some universities and in some groups, PhD positions are 100% paid as jobs, while at other universities and in other groups, PhD positions are 50% employee, 50% student. I cannot vouch for the situation in Belgium and/or France.


Should I list memberships that have expired on my resume I was a member of the AMS in 2014, but my school had cut funding for 2015, should I still list I was a member in 2014 on my CV?

When you did some work for the organization (e.g., organize a local conference or chapter meeting), you can put exactly that (e.g. 'co-organized annual XYZ regional meeting in 2014').

When you have built up a network relevant for the employer through the organization, you might also list your membership.

Otherwise, leave it out.


No GRE offered in my country and I cannot really afford traveling elsewhere Would there be any hope in applying to a doctoral STEM program (geared toward EE) in the US without the GRE?

Simply put, there are no test centers offering the GRE in my country, for this year and the upcoming one. In other words, my potential applications for fall 2021 are essentially ruined. And I can unfortunately not afford going elsewhere to take it.

Should I apply without it and take the risk of having my application rejected right from the outset?

I sincerely hope the GRE will be abolished once and for all, for it serves  only
private interests. It is such a financial hurdle for those living in low-income countries.

Any advice or suggestion is more than welcomed.

First, not all universities require the GRE for graduate admissions, but you will need to explore that yourself. Second, under the conditions you cite, you can ask for an exception and it is possible, but not guaranteed, that it will be granted.

The GRE is only one measure of likely success. Its only real advantage is that it is standardized. Any university wants assurance that admitted students are likely to succeed, hence they ask for such standard things. But, it is possible, in some places anyway, to provide that assurance through other means, such as an exceptional record or exceptional letters of recommendation. A prior research record can also help in some fields.


Asking current advisor whether they have funds for remainder of my degree So in my first year of my PhD I was strongly encouraged to apply for fellowships. I submitted fellowship applications happily, but at some points was concerned about how urgent it seemed to my advisor for me to win a fellowship. Examples of this behavior would be saying its very advisable for me to apply to certain fellowships that frankly wouldn’t be worth the effort it takes to apply. This and some other comments leave me wondering about how secure my RA position will be for the rest of my degree. Maybe its just the quarantine making me crazy.

What is the best way to ask an advisor about the funding situation, and would such a question be inappropriate.

For context, I’m in a usually well funded field, where it is common for advisors to be able to fully fund their students, often without them having to TA every semester.

Things are in flux, but you have a right to plan your future with some confidence. I suggest the direct approach. Ask him if there is any funding risk and how to quantify it. If your advisor thinks there is any risk and advises you to seek funding, then you need to just do it. Even if you fail, but show diligence in the search you will probably be better off if funding gets tighter.

You probably have several years to go, so prediction is an imperfect thing. But the further you go, the closer you are to the end, and so the easier it is to keep your funding stream.

Hope for the best that the current problems are temporary and that the world returns to normal. But don't depend on that happening. Work with your advisor as much as possible.

Just ask. Express your concern. If your advisor is at all reasonable it won't be an issue.


Do Machine Learning and Vision Labs outside the USA hire non-student,non-postdoc Research Assistants? I am currently on a visiting research assistant position at a US university for a year. My visa will not allow me to start a similar position in the US after this stint is over, and I am looking for another yearlong research position before I start a Masters/PhD program from Fall 2015.

My current research involves Vision with Graphical Models. I am interested in pursuing research in Vision, or Computational Biology involving Graphical Models and Machine Learning methods.

So is it possible to work as a Research Assistant in this field, outside the USA, without a doctorate, and without being a student?

Short answer to the question "is it possible?": yes, it is. E.g. in Germany, we can employ a person having some academic degree. The more important question is: What would you be willing to earn because at least in Germany, academic position usually are not the best paid ones.

If you just want to earn money and get experience, I would recommend a job in industry. If you really want to learn and develop yourself, and you don't have to earn much, look around in Europe. If you bring your own money (e.g. DAAD scholarship), you could start in my lab ;o).


PhD Dissertation Introduction: What to call section on thesis structure/overview? I'm currently working on the introduction section of my PhD dissertation (subject is physical oceanography; mostly ocean modelling), and I'm not sure what to title the subsection describing the structure of the rest of the document.  So far, Chapter 1, the Introduction, contains the following:

Three opening paragraphs
Section: Background (i.e., Lit review/motivation)
Section: Research Cruise (brief description of research cruise and project my work is associated with)

I want to add another section describing the order of chapters and a bit on how they fit together, but I'm at a loss for what to call this section and haven't seen any good examples.  "Structure"? "Overview"? "Outline"? Something else?  Is there a particular title that conveys the point "This is a description of my dissertation structure so you don't get lost", but with a bit more subtlety than "Thesis Outline"?

Thanks in advance.

Personally, I wouldn't worry about subtlety in titles.  People who read your thesis are not looking for subtlety, but for information, and particularly from the overview section.  Just call it "Overview" or "Outline" and don't worry about it.


Research approach for PhD thesis in Taoism: top down vs. bottom up Originally I conceived of posting a "Roadmap for researching x" but I assume that would be too localized for this site.

Background: After much dilly-dallying, I have finally zoned in to pursue lifetime in Taoist research. I have studied mathematical philosophy, cultural anthropology, symbolic logic and enrolled in Eastern studies class for next semester. I understand the professor for latter class would be an excellent source of reference but currently semester is closed.

Problems facing: As I learned in English class it is important to take copious notes during research even if it means 24 hours so I am currently photographing everything that pertains to Taoism. But due to the complex nature of the subject itself and the concept of wu-wei, action in non-action, I am unsure as to how to approach research. I understand if I pursue degree in this field I should familiarize myself with the language and journals and pretty much everything that is related to it. This brings me to my original point:

Question: What would be a good strategy to do research on Taoism? Do I conceive of a thesis and work downwards from it? Or do I start from the scratch - so to speak- and bootstrap my way to a knowledge base. Problem with latter and given the complex nature is if I start with no thesis, then it would be an aimless wandering. But- then again, isn't that what Taoism is all about?

EDIT: In lieu of JeffE's comment below I am rephrasing the original question:

  During a research, is it a good idea to start with a working thesis as early as possible?

In general, I agree with JeffE. Both top down and bottom up.

In the case of Taoism, there is more - how proficient is your Chinese?

You said pursue lifetime in Taoist research. I am not sure you can do that without knowledge in Chinese language equivalent to at least masters degree in Chinese.

Taoism is rooted from Laozi's original text Daodejing. Reference Taoism. Most native Chinese speakers do not understand that text. If you want to conduct life time research in Taoism, that book is a must read and must understand. Without fully understanding that text, you are at best a second class researcher in Taoism.

I am a native Chinese speaker. How much do I understand the text? Less than 5%. If I spend 20 years or more on it, I might be able to understand 80% of it. Actually, I am bluffing. Some people contribute his whole life in it and then claimed that he only understood less than half.


Alternatives to supervisor for letter of recommendation I am applying to an executive MBA program. Of course, letters of recommendation are needed. My supervisor has, on multiple occasions attempted to discourage me from applying to any graduate program. He has said than an MBA is a "waste of time". He has said that a PhD would "not help" me. The only programs he has expressed any favor with are those that are 1) on our campus and 2) are simply training in skills that I already use in my current position. He has claimed that he could, personally, "certify" me regarding management skills. He's a professor at a university biological research department. I have been working for him since about 2002, with a brief gap where I moved away to care for a relative. It essentially looks like I will not get a letter of recommendation from him.

What can I do?

I am no expert on MBA admissions, but I believe they are looking for letters attest to qualities beyond the ability to do well in school, such as entrepreneurship, community service, leadership, and so forth. If your current boss--it sounds like that's what you mean by "supervisor"--is as weirdly hostile as you say, don't ask him for a letter. Look for other respected people in your network who can speak to the qualities MBA programs are looking for, such as administrators, elected officials, community leaders, or even clients.


Is it crass to acknowledge a colleague that passed away in my thesis? A PhD student in our school recently passed away unexpectedly, to the shock and  grief of a large number of research students and academics, including me.

I had little to do with him on a daily basis, and he had little to nothing to do with the content of the thesis, but nonetheless it occurs to me to make a mention of his passing in the acknowledgements of my own (Honours) thesis.

Is this appropriate, or could it come off as disrespectful?

I certainly don't think it's "crass", and I have a hard time seeing who could be disrespected.  In general, you can acknowledge whomever you want in a thesis and the only crass thing would be to say something negative about them.

However, there is possibly a bit of room for misunderstanding here, because the ostensible purpose of the acknowledgments is to recognize people who helped you out in some way.  Based on what you write -- you were not close, and he did not help on your thesis -- it doesn't make sense to thank this person in the acknowledgements.

I might instead suggest going for a dedication or commemoration.  Some ways of wording this are given here.  You could either end the acknowledgments with a dedication, probably in its own separate paragraph (and you can dedicate the thesis to more than one person, if you like), or you could include the dedication on its own page separately in the thesis, e.g. "For X", "In memory of X (19xx - 20xx)", etc.

Speaking personally, I like the look of the latter, and I find it to be the opposite of crass to take time out to remember the departed, whether they had a special relationship with you or not.  You are doing your part to make sure that your fellow student will not be completely forgotten for some time to come.  Good for you.