Survey or original article: Which one is more important to get postdoc or tenure-track position? There are two main opinions about originality and contribution of ISI (journals which are indexed and listed in JCR report by Thomson Routers)* survey/review journal articles compared to original articles in ISI journals. Some scientists consider survey papers lacking originality while others think the opposite especially for survey articles presenting the state-of-the-art and research challenges. So, I am wondering, in general, which type of article has the most impact on an applicant's success when applying for a postdoc or tenure track position; survey or original article?

*It was asked earlier, so it is wise to put its meaning for clarity.
-Certainly having both of them is the best, but among these two which one has more impact.

There's no simple answer to this question, because there are a lot of variables left undefined. I think this is what we can call an example of a "false dichotomy." For instance, consider the following examples from physics:

A first-author "original" publication in a journal such as Physica A might not be as useful as a first-author review paper in Reviews of Modern Physics.
Being third author on a review paper in Reviews of Modern Physics might not be as useful as first author on a paper in Physical Review Letters.
The stage in one's career also makes a difference in some fields: a postdoc might not be asked to do a review in some fields, but might in others. (Tenure-track professors are a separate category in this respect.)

So I think there are a lot of issues to be considered in this process. However, if one is a postdoc, this is also a conversation to have with one's research supervisor. In general, such articles would be written with their involvement and participation.


Informative article about physics and quote on "physicists don't care about precise numbers, they care about trends" I am writing an informative article about physics for the general public, and I was wondering if there is any quote by some famous physicist on the concept that usually physicist care about understanding trends more than predicting precise numbers.
In particular, I would like to convey the message that for a physicist developing a general model which explains the trend of multiple physical phenomenas is much more rewarding than developing a very specific model which explains very well one single physical phenomena but is limited to it.

I found Fermi's quote "Better be Approximately Right than Precisely Wrong", but I would prefer something containing the word "trend" (e.g. once I heard a physics professor saying "I don't care about numbers, I care about trends", this would be perfect for my scope, but it would look much better if this was said by some illustrious physicist).

P.S. I am not sure this is the best platform to post this question, any suggestion for more suitable place to ask this is more than Wellcome.

I do not agree that physicists are more concerned to obtain a qualitative analysis than a quantitative one. However, your question is not about my believes, so ...

Einstein: "If I can’t picture it, I don't understand it."
Dirac: I don't know the exact quote, but he said something like: "In order to understand a differential equation I have to be able to predict the limiting cases, and not solving the actual equation".

You will find the exact quotes in the internet.


Directly contacting a referee of my paper A few months ago, I submitted a paper to a journal, and received a "can be published if such-and-such issues are addressed properly". I know who one of the reviewers (the one that wrote the most helpful review, in fact) is, largely because he decided to reveal his name in the review. In a couple of weeks, I'll happen to be in the vicinity of his university (this is serendipitous; I had already planned this trip before I knew he would be one of the reviewers).

Is it acceptable to contact him, tell him I'm the author of that paper he reviewed, and ask him if he has time for a meeting to discuss how I am addressing his comments? I have no shame in admitting that I am considering doing this to ensure that he is happy with my amendments to the paper, which in turn should make the second round of reviewing go more smoothly.

This should depend on the journal policy. Both you as an author and the reviewer are bound by the rules the journal has in place with respect to the publication process. While it sounds like you are meeting with the reviewer solely for the purpose of improving the paper but it may come across as going out of one's way to others. To be on the safe side, I would suggest you contact the journal editor before organizing such a meeting. With a sign-off from the editor, you can be sure that you are playing a fair game. I would also keep co-authors in the loop if any.


Tough Editor, How to handle? I have got the first revision of my paper from a journal in Elsiver. Despite, all 3 reviewers' comment are very positive and accepted the paper the editor is so tough. He is questioning the originality of the proposed method and also saying the paper is not very much in the scope of journal.
If so, why did you hand it to reviewers?!!!
Any idea to answer him/her?

I really think that you are looking at things the wrong way.  The key fact -- your paper has not been rejected! -- was left unsaid in the question itself but got pulled out of you in the comments.  What makes an editor "tough" or not has virtually nothing to do with the words he uses to describe your paper.  A truly tough editor will reject your paper based on flaws that you disagree with or feel are very minor.  A moderately tough editor will require drastic revisions (perhaps in multiple rounds) that take up your time and delay the acceptance and/or publication of your paper.  That's about it.

You don't sound very well informed about the process.  What you received were not "revisions" but "reports" or "reviews".  Moreover it is not for a referee/reviewer to accept or reject a paper.  That is up to the editorial board.  Rather, a referee/reviewer should recommend acceptance or rejection -- I have just learned that in some journals and fields this recommendation is made confidentially to the editor; that is certainly not the case in mathematics, and I think it is a poor idea to keep this information from the author, but let me not digress -- and then the majority of the report / review should contain support for that recommendation.  (So if a report is thorough and well written, the author should be able guess immediately and accurately what the recommendation will be.  Thus hiding the recommendation seems pointless.)  A report which just says "Accept" is worthless, and many editors would just discard it.

  He is questioning the originality of the proposed method and also saying the paper is not very much in the scope of journal. If so, why did you hand it to reviewers?!!!

The alternative would be to reject the paper immediately.  Obviously the editor's reservations about the paper did not rise to that level.  It doesn't make much sense that you are complaining about that.

  Any idea to answer him/her?

Yes.  Your answer should come in the form of a revised paper that at least addresses all of his suggestions (which, by the way, can probably be addressed with relatively superficial changes, mostly to the introduction and the conclusion, if present).  If you don't understand a suggestion, you can write for clarification, but I would be careful about that since the editor's impression of your willingness and ability to make the changes is part of his assessment of the paper.  If you are really new at this (it sounds like you are, honestly) then I highly recommend that you consult at least one advisor, mentor or senior colleague about how to perform these revisions.

The one worrisome part of what the editor said is

  The present form does not have sufficient results to justify the novelty of a high quality journal paper.

If the editor (or the editorial board) really feels that the results are not strong enough to merit publication in that journal, they can and probably will reject your paper, no matter what any number of referees says.  I have seen this happen as a referee: I wrote a quite positive report, but the editor (a former mentor of mine) called me up on the phone to tell me that the paper was not going to be accepted.  However, it is a bit strange to say that while still asking for a revision.  Reading between the lines, the implication is that he finds the work of the paper a bit borderline, so he really wants the presentation to be otherwise impeccable.

Of course you always have the option of not revising the paper, and starting fresh with a different journal.  But I don't recommend that: when you are asked to revise, revise.  The vast majority of time, that means "accepted with some penance".


How can I address several deans in a letter? I am part of the student council at my college and I would like to email a letter to all of the deans.

How can I start the letter without writing "Dear Deans?"

One solution would be: instead of sending a single email addressed to all of them, send each one a separate message, addressed to them personally and with an appropriate salutation.  This is also more likely to get their attention than something that appears to be a mass-mailed form letter.  If it's important that they know the same letter is being sent to the other deans, say so in the text.


What exactly is an "academic plan"? I am looking to one job opening for a Lecturer position in a university (mostly dedicated to teaching but expanding its research capabilities), which asks me to submit a "proposal of academic plan". The application is actually in Spanish, and the above is a literal translation of "propuesta de plan academico". The job opening has no further information on what the latter means, as if it were self explanatory. I could well contact them, but first I want to see if this is something very obvious to you.

What do I think it would be? Not sure. A bit of research agenda perhaps, combined with prospect teaching courses, and perhaps personal development as academic, e.g. training, network building, etc.

Any ideas?

I suspect that even if the TERM is not defined, that knowing the JOB will help you make a proper submission.  Is it a postdoc or lecutureship or tenure track? Even if the job description is scanty (but why would you invest time in a detailed submission for a job that you don't know what it is), you can make some guesses based on the school, group, etc.  Is the school a teaching or research university?

So, I really don't understand coming at this thing with a "can you explain this term to me" versus giving more context, clues.  This is both you might answer the question yourself or how we might help you.

Also, I would reach out say you are interested and ask for guidance.


Continuing to list as second affiliation an institute where you've never had a paid position This question is similar to other questions of affiliation, but I cannot find anything that quite addresses it. Perhaps this is closest: Adding affiliation due to a 1-month visit during a salary gap
I am the PI on a grant in mathematics. On the grant I have a collaborator and postdoc employed at 100% capacity (1 FTE). We are about to have a paper published. In addition to his current affiliation, University A, he wants to list University B at which he did his last postdoc, which I think is fine as much of the work on the paper was carried out there.
In addition, he wants to list a third affiliation, University C. He has never had a paid position at University C. It seems that someone at University C said it would be okay to use this affiliation during a period of time when he was unemployed but looking for another postdoc. None of the work of the current paper was done during this time of unemployment. Indeed, he plans to keep using this affiliation in the future. As far as I know, he has no collaborations with any researchers there, nor has he lived in the city where the university is located during this time of unemployment. I cannot find any online reference to his being at that university, other than those references he has created himself (eg. I find papers of his, or his CV or personal website, but nothing from the university itself).
Is using this affiliation ethical?
I understand that one should generally leave it up to their collaborators to decide their affiliations. However, in this case, he is employed on my grant at 100% capacity and I am worried the granting agency will not be happy that he is also apparently employed at the same time at another university in another country.
I have suggested he put University C in the acknowledgments section, but he is not willing to accept this compromise.

It’s dishonest (and therefore unethical in almost all normal circumstances) to represent yourself as something you’re not. That’s what your grant employee wants to do by listing his affiliation as a place where he doesn’t hold an official title (and it’s irrelevant whether “someone said it’s okay” unless perhaps that someone is a dean or a similar high-ranking person who has the authority to give people official titles; it’s also not strictly speaking relevant whether he had a “paid position” or not - some official titles are unpaid).
As for what to do, I agree with your reasoning that this is your responsibility since he is paid with your grant funds. It’s perfectly appropriate for you to say that he cannot write this dishonest affiliation in any paper that is funded by your grant. If he does not accept this, you should check with your institution what enforcement or disciplinary measures can be taken in connection with this type of employee insubordination. It may also be worth trying to talk to him informally (perhaps in the presence of a “neutral” senior colleague) and see if you can understand the motive for this behavior; possibly it’s based on some misconception on the part of the employee, and you may be able to convince him that there’s nothing to be gained, and much to be lost, from this type of dishonest behavior.


What is the scientific term for a “research gap”? After I read about 40 papers in my research topic, I summarized 25 of them in my thesis, explaining methods used and solutions provided in the literature survey and literature-review sections. I found out a gap in the previous researches and would like to point it out in my thesis, in order to explain where my work would fit.

Should I call this section research gap, or there are a better scientific terms usually used?

"Literature review" would be a good term. It refers to the section in a paper where you review the existing literature and show where your new piece of research fits in.

Don't confuse this with a "review article", which summarizes and integrates a large number of previous publications, typically far more publications than you'd review for an original article. A review article typically only does the synthesis, and does not add any original research of its own, although it may well point out gaps in existing research for subsequent investigations.

In you want to draw specific attention to the fact that the question you will investigate has not been covered in previous research, you could call it "open questions".


(Master's Degree) What are they 'precisely' looking for in a Statement of Purpose, and does a SOP matter when one has excellent GPA? (N.b. All my questions are concerning applying for a Master's degree)

I have read a lot of websites, articles, extracts from different books about the Statement of Purpose (Motivation Letter). I'm still not quite sure how to write a 'breathtaking' SOP to blow the reader's brain.

For example, I don't know how to present my interest in my field of study in a brilliant way to amaze the person reading it. I am very interested in my field and I can think of million things I can do with it, but still I don't know the best way to present that interest. Most people say that I need a 'grip', an interesting story from my own life that made me become interested in my field of study. But let me be honest, I have none, not everybody has that sudden 'turning point' in their life. My interest in my field of study just happened over time; one day I saw that, hey this is pretty a fascinating field of study and it totally matches my interest in different fields, I can apply the knowledge gained from this field to almost anything. So nothing extraordinary, it just happened with no reason.

I have also read hundreds of samples online, and they all look totally the same, they say that SOP has to be distinctive, but that's exactly what I didn't see in the samples I read - they all start with a memory of their childhood and finish with how much they'd love to contribute to society and mankind and become a researcher.

I am really lost about writing a SOP. I think I'm even more lost because I have read thousands of articles and books and have heard a lot of different opinions for the past 2 months. I am not sure what a "superb" SOP is, and I am not quite sure what the admission committee looks for...

Finally, I have a tiny last question; Does the Statement of Purpose matter as much if one has a GPA of 92%?

What I'll write is based on my experience with mathematics Ph.D. admissions in the U.S.  How far it generalizes beyond that may depend on the circumstances.  (I'd bet much of it would still apply to a research-based master's program in computer science, but perhaps not to an MBA program.)  Note that U.S. graduate programs in math primarily take students who have just graduated from undergraduate programs, so the target audience is not so different from those applying for master's degrees.

  I'm still not quite sure how to write a 'breathtaking' SOP to blow the reader's brain.

It's impossible to write a breathtaking or superb statement of purpose, and I mean literally impossible: such a statement does not exist.  Even if Einstein and Shakespeare collaborated to write one for you, the best they could do would be to write a good statement of purpose.  Once your statement hits the ceiling, there's nothing more it can do to help your chances of admission, and the ceiling is low enough that a substantial fraction of applicants reach it.  If I had to make up a number based on my impressions from reading applications, I'd estimate that a third of all applicants write a good enough statement of purpose that trying to do better would be a complete waste of time, and many of the others at least write pretty good statements.  [By contrast, the ceiling is vastly higher for letters of recommendation, as well as for accomplishments as an undergraduate.]

It's certainly possible to write a terrible statement of purpose.  If you come across as a jerk or seem incompetent or dishonest, you can ruin your chances of admission, no matter how good the rest of your application is.  Even a statement that has nothing outrageously wrong with it can hurt your application if it's poorly done.

Unfortunately, there's a lot of bad advice on the internet.  Some of the common recommendations, such as childhood memories or inspirational quotes, will not help at all since they simply aren't relevant to the admissions decision.  At best, they come across as a little naive (and committee members will groan about another applicant who was inspired by Marie Curie), but they probably won't hurt your application if you include genuine content in your statement of purpose as well.  At worst, they will fill up your entire statement and render it useless.

Similarly, you don't want to write a "unique" statement of purpose.  It makes sense to include explanation if there's actually something unique about your application, but there's no value in writing a statement that's gratuitously different from everyone else's.  The admissions committee isn't trying to understand what makes you a unique and special snowflake, but rather what makes you a good prospect for graduate school.  That's not a genre of writing that generally benefits from wild creativity.

So what are committee members looking for?  This varies a little from person to person, of course, but here's a first approximation:

Do you know what you're getting yourself into?  Do you have a good feeling for what graduate school entails and what's involved in your chosen field?  Do you sound like you know what you're talking about?  (Don't bluff!  It's better to demonstrate an impressive undergraduate-level understanding than to look like you're pretending to have even deeper insight.)  There are any number of ways to mess this up.  You can sound clueless, you can display crackpot-style fantasies, you can sound like you are choosing grad school to put off having to get a job, etc.
Can you summarize and highlight aspects of your background in a way that shows some maturity and perspective?  This could include undergraduate research, an undergraduate thesis or capstone project, favorite courses, outside reading, etc.  Some students do things that sound impressive from a one-line description on the CV, but when they explain in more detail it sounds a little hollow, like they never really got into it or learned much from it.  Others are able to take similar experiences and fashion a more compelling case for going to graduate school.  For example, if you are describing undergraduate research, it's generally not enough just to give a brief descriptions of your results.  You should also explain the purpose and motivation behind the research and reflect on the experience.  (Maybe it pointed you towards what you'd like to do in grad school, maybe it showed you what you don't want to do, maybe it made it clear what you need to learn, etc.)
Can you explain anything that's unusual or worrisome about your background?  You don't want to overemphasize these things (your explanation should be just part of your statement, preferably not right at the beginning or end), but this is your chance to put everything in context and explain why any apparent flaws should not worry the committee.
Do you have compelling plans for the future?  You certainly don't need to have your whole career mapped out (that comes across as silly), or even your whole time in graduate school.  However, it's best to show that you are moving forward thoughtfully and sensibly, rather than just applying to grad school because that's what comes next.

You shouldn't panic about writing a statement of purpose.  Remember that your goal is not to write something brilliant, but rather something good enough.  (For example, there's no way you could demonstrate amazing plans for the future or profound insight you derived from reflecting on undergraduate research.  That just can't be done in a document of this length and style, so you just need to aim for good plans and good insight.)

It sounds like you are caught in tons of stress and planning before trying to write anything.  What I'd recommend is this:  Take a few hours and write a first draft, while keeping in mind the questions I listed above.  Then get feedback from friends and mentors, and pay the most attention to feedback from people who have served on admissions committees.  Probably you'll decide to make some minor changes and be done with it.  The worst case scenario is that you somehow did a lousy job, in which case you should reflect on what people didn't like about your first attempt and try again.  Either way, you'll have a decent statement of purpose by your second attempt, and probably the first.

  Does the Statement of Purpose matter as much if one has a GPA of 92%?

Some aspects (such as explaining poor grades) may be less relevant, but most of the things I listed above still matter.

  My interest in my field of study just happened over time; one day I saw that, hey this is pretty a fascinating filed of study and it totally matches my interest in different fields, I can apply the knowledge gained from this field to almost anything. So nothing extraordinary, it just happened with no reason.

You're right that this is nothing extraordinary, but that's fine, and it's very far from having no reason at all.  A bad statement of purpose says "I've loved area X since I was a child and have always dreamt of contributing to this field.  Admission to the University of Y will help me achieve my dreams."  That's nothing but a fancy way of saying you'd like to do X, without giving much of a reason.  Instead, a good statement of purpose could say "Area X fascinates me because it brings together my interests in A, B, and C.  [...further explanation...]  Among the many applications, D and E particularly appeal to me.  [...further explanation...]  Faculty members U and V work on related topics, which is why the University of Y would be an excellent fit for my interests."

If you can elaborate on your reasons that are "nothing extraordinary", you'll already be well on your way to writing a good statement of purpose.


Which letter of reference would be better: from a teacher who knows me well or from one in the same institution I am applying for who doesn't know me? I am applying for a second masters degree at the same institution I am currently at.
I have requested my current course teacher to write me an LoR (letter of reference). However, I am facing the problem that he may not know me that well. I didn't have many interactions with him during the online lectures or seminars this year because of the covid situation. The only way he learnt about me was through a mock exam which I got a score slightly above distinction (I am in the UK). So I think he may only be able to write a very general letter.
I also asked teachers from my bachelor's degree. I built a very strong relationship with them and did extremely well in their courses. So I am pretty sure that their letters will be filled with details.
I previously thought that my current teacher would not be willing to provide me with a letter because he didn't get back to me for more than two weeks. But now I am in a dilemma. On one hand, his endorsement would be more reliable and powerful in the sense that he is in the same institution. On the other, his letter will be quite general. So should I still ask him?
Thanks in advance for any solid advice!

Generally speaking, the LOR that recites a lot of detail and describes a long relationship is more helpful.  When I write an LOR, I assume the reader has no idea who I am or what my standards are.  So, that's why I try to give a lot of objective information about my relationship with the student, so the reader can decide for themselves whether they agree the evidence supports my recommendation.  I'm sometimes asked for LORs from students I don't know very well.  Perhaps they're sophomore and they were in my section of a large intro CS class.  I try my best but realistically those LORs will never be as helpful as the ones I write about a student I've known for several years, was in a small class where I really got to know their work, has been in my office a lot, worked for me as instructional aide for a class I taught, etc.


From a financial standpoint, how much more can I expect to earn after my degree? While certainly there is value to learning something you are passionate about, one might also have to consider the finnacial responsibilities after college. Thankfully for me, what I am passionate about is also what I can expect to make a decent career out of.

I am entering college as a mechanical engineering student, however I feel like I would very much like to pursue a double major, the second degree being in math. While what drives me to this is my interest and passion in the subject (Ive always been a fan of numbers), I can't help but pause to consider if the extra time and money spent is practical. In short, how much more can I reasonably expect to make with a bachelor's degree in math and in mechanical engineering, upon graduation?

Pursue the dual major because it interests you and this is your opportunity to do  it, not because you expect a higher salary, because the higher salary probably won't happen.

I spent a long career in industry in engineering before coming out of retirement to teach a few years ago.  In my experience, hiring managers generally don't care that someone was a dual major.  Part of this may be a reflection of the fact that managers tend to hire people who "look like them".  Not very many managers were dual majors, so they don't value it.  But there's a practicality to it as well:  If they're hiring you to be an engineer, it's probably because you are an engineer, not because you're also a mathematician.

What hiring managers do value is the master's degree.  Again, this may be in part because so many hiring managers have master's degrees (which many of them may have earned part-time while working).  Hiring managers tend to have master's degrees, so they like to hire people with master's degrees, and they will pay more to get them.

If your concern is best financial return on any additional effort beyond what it takes to get a bachelor's degree, I recommend going for the master's over the dual major.  Many universities have programs that allow students to go straight through to their master's, double-counting some of their credits and earning both degrees with just one more year of coursework only, no thesis required.  For example, here at University of Michigan in computer science, where I teach, it's  called SUGS (Sequential Undergraduate/Graduate Studies); to be admitted to the program you need to be a junior or a senior with a 3.6 GPA.  Your school probably has a similar program.

If your objective is a career in industry and you're concerned about "bang for the buck", the master's is the way to go.


Can a professor force you to buy a book, for use in his exam? I'm a first year law student in the UK. For our EU Law class, our professor declared that we must bring an unannotated physical copy of Blackstone's EU Treaties & Legislation 2018-2019 to our exam and use it. Thus we must buy it.

Our Prof admitted that these laws are free online. But we obviously can't bring our own printouts to the exam, as the invigilators can't check each student's printout.
The professors for my three other classes don't require us to buy any book for the exam, as they'll provide us with the legislation for the exam.

Thus why don't the EU Law professors do the same? I wonder...laziness?

Our professor ought to provide the legislation, because the book

is a waste of money. Statues and legislations change yearly, and this book's going to be outdated. In fact, scroll down the Amazon page, and you'll see that the book has a new edition  published yearly.
is too eco-unfriendly! 1 sheet/2 pages  x 696 pages x 200 students = 69,600 sheets! And the professor has been requiring this book for many years.
may be unaffordable. It's £14.99 + £3 VAT, which is under the poverty threshold.

I emailed our professor many times, but he never replied. I prefer to stay confidential, and not to confront him or the administration face-to-face. I emailed the administration, but they just keep repeating the professor's order to buy the book.

As user2768 already pointed out in a comment, the question is not whether the prof can force you (no, they can not), but if it is reasonable / fair to require a specific book for an exam.

The answer can depend on many factors:

Is the professor the author of the book? If yes, I would see an issue because this would boost their personal income. This does not seem to be the case in your situation.
Can the exam be completed without the book? E.g. in technical fields, it might be helpful to have a formulary, in languages a dictionary, etc. In most cases, it it just reasonable to use such a book because otherwise you would have to memorize too many facts / formulas, etc.
Is the book a pre-requisite for doing the exam? I did not study law, but from my understanding, one of the natures of law is to derive conclusions based on written text (especially laws). Therefore, it is impossible to do the exam without access to the original law text. So in your specific case, I would say the professor has to require the book, otherwise it would be impossible to do a proper exam.
Is the price / effort unseasonably high? In your case the short answer is "no". In fact it is extremely cheap.
Are there reasonable alternatives to a printed book? Electronic versions of the text would provide an unfair advantage over students using he paper version since they are searchable, in addition it is difficult to guarantee the sanity of the device. One solution might be to provide each student with a computer holding a local copy of the law text and having the internet connection disabled during the exam. The university would need a tremendous infrastructure for that.

To make a long story short: Buy the book. And don't throw it away after one year ;-). Maybe you can hand it over to a student next year.

One additional idea: If you are having some sort of students association: Ask them to organize a bookshelf for such kind of literature.


May I ask professors to reschedule two back to back night classes from 4:30PM to 9:00PM? As a graduate school student, I have two professors teaching two separate classes that go from 4:30PM to 5:50pm and 6:00pm to 9:00PM. This happens every one day of the week.
I'm not sure whether I can handle concentrating for 5 hours and I have the option to not take a class but it would delay graduating by a semester.
Do I negotiate with the professor to reschedule or do they have the power to deny it?

Academic timetabling is a notoriously difficult problem. Professors have several classes to teach, students have several classes to attend. There are restrictions related to classroom sizes, specific equipment (e.g. computer labs). Some professors may have individual restrictions, e.g. can only teach on specific days or hours due to other commitments.
Normally, Professors do not decide their own timetables, but submit their preferences to the Timetabling Office, which then generates a timetable for everyone. Students can also try to submit their requests, but usually as a groups (cohorts), not individually. If you are not happy with your timetable, it is definitely worth trying to change it, but bear in mind that it may not be easy.
However, if you class is scheduled up until 9pm, which is significantly beyond the core hours, you actually have a much better chance of having this class rescheduled, particularly if any of other students attending the same late class have caring responsibilities. Your Student Rep / Student Union Rep / Athena Swan Rep (in the UK) might be able to help you with the process.


What does it mean by "Follow-up Masters"? I see various universities in Czech Republic and Netherlands offer a type of Masters degree called "Follow-up Masters".

What does "Follow-up Masters" actually mean?

I can't speak for the Czech system, but in the Netherlands a follow-up master is a master program specifically designed for students who completed a certain bachelor program.

All students who graduated from that bachelor program (and selected similar programs at other Dutch universities) are accepted into the master automatically. If you did not graduate from one of these bachelor programs (for example, because you studied abroad), you have to apply to the university for a certificate of admission (bewijs van toelating). In that case, the university decides whether you can be admitted anyway, can be admitted after following a so-called homologation program1, or cannot be admitted.

One reason these programs exist is that the introduction of the bachelor-master system in the Netherlands is quite recent (2002). Before, universities offered longer (~5-year) programs that resulted in a degree comparable to a Masters. With the introduction of the new system, many universities simply split their existing programs into a bachelor program (typically 3 years) and a "follow-up" master program (1-2 years).

1 The University of Twente describes homologation courses as:

  Homologation courses (bridging courses) are advanced bachelor courses that you will have to follow if they contain essential knowledge for your master’s programme. [...] The courses depend on the chosen specialization and they have been selected by the Admission Committee.


How to reference studies mentioned in a paper without having to read the original papers? I'm review the literature at the moment. Now I'm reading a paper that mention other studies. How can I reference them without reading the original papers?

Let us assume, for example, you read Doe (2011) and find Smith (1966) referenced therein. Technically, you can say something like "Smith (1966, cited in Doe, 2011)", or alternatively "(Smith 1966, cited in Doe, 2011)." The exact format depends on the format of the journal (it is also possible to phrase it "cited by" instead of "cited in").

That said, however, it is very dangerous to provide such quotes since you do not know if the person(s) citing the paper has understood it correctly. It is not unheard of that people cite for very odd reasons and not double-checking works cited may just propagate such errors.

So, it is possible but not recommended.


Spousal hire for girlfriend in US university I got a tenure-track academic offer in the US.

I am wondering how common/likely is to get the University to do a non-academic spousal hire for my girlfriend.
All the documents provided by my institution use the word "partner" which seems to suggest that it is not needed to be married.

Do you think that being married is typically an (unwritten) necessary condition?

Do you think that asking for help for finding a job for my girlfriend is only possible during negotiation, or I could potentially ask for this later?

Do you think it is possible, instead of getting a position for my girlfriend, getting a graduate school position for her?

If in the future we will break up, could this potentially affect my reputation with the department?

I guess most of these questions have an "official" answer and a "in reality" answer, but I would like to hear other people's opinion.

I am wondering how common/likely is to get the University to do a non-academic spousal hire for my girlfriend. All the documents provided by my institution use the word "partner" which seems to suggest that it is not needed to be married.
  Do you think that being married is typically an (unwritten) necessary condition?

Only your institution will know for sure, but it certainly does not seem unreasonable to ask. Given the wording I would be cautiously optimistic. However, visa might be a problem (as Herman mentions in a comment). The university maybe does not care much about your relationship status when finding a position for your partner, but they may care about having to sponsor a visa (this costs additional money).

  Do you think that asking for help for finding a job for my girlfriend is only possible during negotiation, or I could potentially ask for this later?

You should get all discussions about benefits (and spousal hire is a pretty major one) out of the way during negotiation.

  Do you think it is possible, instead of getting a position for my girlfriend, getting a graduate school position for her?

Assuming your girlfriend is reasonably qualified finding a graduate school position is probably easier than a regular job. However, an additional challenge may be if she would like to attend graduate school in your own department - then conflict of interest rules may kick in.

  If in the future we will break up, could this potentially affect my reputation with the department?

Unless "in the future" is like one month after coming to the US, I doubt that the department will care very much.


Doing an individual PhD in Germany from abroad In the next months I was planning to start an individual PhD in the Humanities at a German university. However, due to coronavirus restrictions I might not be able (or it might not be advisable) to move there for some months; while remaining in my home country, I might have to get a (non-academic) job in order to support myself.
Hence my question: assuming my potential supervisor agrees to keep most of our interactions virtual (videocalls/mails/etc), with occasional personal meetings, is it possible and feasible to pursue an individual Phd in Germany living (and perhaps working) in another country? As far as I know, both the PhD type (individual doctorate/Einzelpromotion) and the study field (Humanities) may allow for a larger degree of autonomy on the side of the candidate.
Please note the question is largely theoretical -- hopefully, I'll be able to move to Germany as soon as possible and find funding or employment there.

This question is very difficult to answer in general as PhD programs and their rules are hardly standardized in Germany, every university can mostly do as they please.
In my research institute (STEM) PhD students are employed workforce and as such your contract cannot start before you present yourself to HR at least once in person. But this does not seem to be the case for you.
During these Covid days many rules have also changed or are temporarily not applied. In my experience, the administrations have become very relaxed, allowing many things that were not permitted before. For example, a friend of mine was able to receive the written assessment of his thesis by email, vowing to delete it again, while normally it is strictly required to read it in person, under supervision and the strict ban of any recording devices.
As such, in general, if your supervisor agrees to you staying in your country as long as Corona is around, there will probably be a way to make it happen.


Standing out in the era of big science How do scientists who choose to work on big collaborative projects (e.g. LHC experiments, LIGO, etc.) differentiate themselves when time comes to apply for post doc/professor positions, considering their papers can have hundreds or more authors?

Primarily by succeeding in the informal respect economy that operates in these fields.

He or she needs to impress the people they collaborate with (especially those who work with them daily or weekly) by some set of

Playing an active part in a large number of useful side projects and analyses.
Spotting danger to the physical apparatus coming before things actually break.
Building, fixing and maintaining parts of the physical apparatus.
Contributing significant parts of the production software.
Dealing with difficult parts of the analysis (covariance analysis, systematic uncertainties, finding way to measure irreducible backgrounds, etc).
Doing a good job of promoting the project, giving talks and interacting with the press.

but most of all

Taking a leadership role in planning and organizing the experimental effort (from conception though feasibility analysis, design, construction, commissioning, calibration, operation through analysis and publication).

Starting at the level of a junior professor dealing with funding becomes a very important part of the mix, as does providing students and post-docs who are themselves good contributors.

The flip side is the way you evaluate candidates is heavily driven by who you know (it is easier to get a foot in the door if you have worked with someone at the hiring institution), by letters of recommendation and by word of mouth inquires (so gossip plays a part here).


Do workshop publications hold the same value as conference publications in CS? I had missed deadline for a reputable conference (Computer Science). Now I see that a workshop is being organized with the conference which exactly aligns with my area of research. The workshop proceedings will be published with the conference proceedings. (It is the first workshop in this series)

Does a workshop publication holds same value as a conference publication for PhD work, future employment opportunities etc. ? (I am a PhD Candidate as of now)

Edit

My field is Computer Vision
The conference is ECCV

No, workshops are generally (at least in my area of CS) of much lower value than full conference proceedings. (Especially when held before a more major conference.) Even though workshop proceedings are published, they are not always considered archival, and usually are stepping stones to full publications later on. A workshop is a good place to get feedback on ideas that can then be upgraded to a "full" publication in the future.

But, I'd strongly advise you to attend the workshop in order to meet and interact with people in the area! You can get great feedback for taking a weak conference submission and making it a strong accept.


Is the "Journal of Advances in Mathematics" a real journal? While looking for a journal to publish my paper I noticed that one of the people I follow on ResearchGate has published his paper in

  Journal of Advances in Mathematics

I never heard of this journal before yet it has impact factor of 1.244 or at least that is what it says on the journal website.

Is this a real mathematics journal or fraud? Thanks.

The Journal of Advances in Mathematics and its publisher are mentioned in this blog post at Scholarly Open Access.  The post explains why the post's author, Jeffrey Beall, believes that the journal and its publisher are not legitimate.


Do grad school admissions care about course load? Do grad school admissions (particularly for Arts) care about how many classes you've taken per semester during your senior years?
For example, I'm (potentially) finishing my undergraduate studies with a 3-class semester. However, during this time I'll also be volunteering in classrooms for experience (I want to do a BEd before a Master's, the latter is far down the line) and potentially working part-time. I've taken 4 to 5 courses for all my other semesters save for one other, when I was also working and doing job searching for my school's Co-op program.
I'm worried, potentially, that a 3-class load will reflect poorly - even though I did a lot of other things during this time. However, my GPA is very high, above what is considered the competitive average to be accepted.
In your experiences how do grad schools weigh overall GPA vs overall class loads?

"In your experiences how do grad schools weigh overall GPA vs overall
class loads?"

GPA is much more important.
Course load is often not even seen, unless people dig into your transcript to more details such as which courses you took and which ones brought up/down your GPA: In this case if you took only 3 courses/term throughout your undergrad, it might raise eyebrows but you are saying it's only your senior year so it won't likely be a problem.
More important than GPA and Course Load combined, is reference letters and publication/research-experience if you have any. GPA means very little to me because I know that a 70% at Oxford (where I did my PhD) is considered a "1st" which is the highest-level of honour and is only awarded to the best of the best students, yet in Canada (where I did my undergrad degrees) it was common to get 90s or even 100% occasionally. Furthermore even within Canada a 90% at University of Waterloo might mean something different from a 90% at Laurier Unviersity (in the same city), and a 90% in Psychology might mean something different from a 90% in Literature (even at the same university), and a 90% in PSYCH 101 with a leniently grading TA might mean something different from a 90% with a harshly grading TA (even for the same course in the same university in the same country!). Your volunteering and experience-gaining, which you say is the reason why you're taking 3 courses instead of 5, might actually be benefiting you more than you imagine, because if you do well you might get a strong reference letter, which is usually more powerful than a good GPA alone.


What are the benefits of serving as a reviewer, initially as a PhD/PostDoc and later as a faculty member/research scientist? The very first thought that comes to mind is that reviewing a paper is like giving back to the academic community. After all, one's own work is published after the efforts of some anonymous reviewer.

But what are the primary incentives that motivate so many researchers to voluntarily serve as reviewers? Does it make a researcher more established/reputed? How does it differ in the case of PhD students as opposed to faculty members?

The primary advantage of peer reviewing is that you are ahead of the researchers in your field by a margin of several months. Second advantage of getting a bad paper for review is that you get an idea "what to avoid" in your own future work. Most people do not realize this because it is not a paid service, nor there is any public acknowledgement on the paper. Several journal editors have mentioned to me that they have difficulty inviting reviewers. I asked an editor of a pretty good review-type journal and he mentioned that at times he has to write to 10-12 people and only a few respond. It is a also common complaint among editors that people from certain countries don't commonly accept peer review requests because the academic promotion is based on paper publications rather than article reviewing.

In short, we should accept review requests, if we feel we are qualified to do so, as a service to the community as well for your own education.


Buying out of teaching duties vs. all duties using grant money My university (in Europe) is currently reconsidering its policy regarding professors (assistant through full) buying out of certain duties using funds from research grants. The new proposal is that the grant money will only be used for buying out of all of the duties at once (research, teaching, administration, ... -- all of them). This is in contrast to, say, buying out of teaching alone or out of all duties but research selectively.

The proposal also includes a clause that the funds obtained by the university from researchers buying themselves out of duties, specifically the amount corresponding to the research duties, will be used for "other initiatives and priorities", i.e. not for supporting research directly.

I see some problems with this policy and wonder if my concerns are justified.

If one does not have a grant, one uses, say, 50% of one's time for research as stipulated by the job contract. One gets remunerated for all the work one does, including research (that seems a natural assumption to me). Under the proposed policy, if one has a grant and buys himself/herself out of all duties, one will still do research for 50% of the time as before, plus another 50% of the time because of the research grant.
What is the logic behind buying oneself out of the 50% of the job one will actually be doing anyway?

Perhaps this could be understandable if the funds were used by the university to employ another person to do all the duties of the original job position, including 50% research, but this is not the case according to the proposed policy. The grant money corresponding the 50% of the research work will not be used to fund another researcher but rather to fund other activities. This seems to partly defeat the purpose of the research grant: the money that is earmarked for research is taken by the university and spent on something else.
Even though one has to buy oneself out of all duties, the university still expects to have its name on the academic production from the grant. So even though the university is not supporting the professor financially, it still wants to receive the benefits that come with achievements in research.

I might be oversimplifying things as I am not very familiar with the system, but the elements indicated above seems problematic to me.

Questions: Does this policy proposal sound fine? Is such practice popular in other universities?

A university doesn't "obtain" funds through buyout -- rather, it frees up salary money that it would otherwise have to spend if the research funds were not in place.

What a university is allowed to do with such funds likely has to do with where the money came from.  In many cases, such funds will be unencumbered, and they can do whatever they want with them.

There are certain kinds of funds that might need to be used to support research, like (in theory) indirect funds from a granting agency.  "Support research" can have broad meaning, such as pay library staff, or keep the rooms where research goes on heated.

I'm not sure I understand the whole situation, the way you've expressed it, but it seems like it gives the university more freedom to creatively release people from responsibilities, and it doesn't set up any alarms for me.


Can the review of a tenure track application start before the reference letters arrive? I was chatting with some friends and some claimed that a tenure track applicant can be reviewed and invited to campus before letters arrive. However, others claim that without the arrival of all 3-5 reference letters nothing will move forward. Can the application review start before the arrival of reference letters or is it similar to graduate students' applications, where the graduate school will not forward the application documents to the department before they are complete?

At least in my department, yes, faculty candidates can be interviewed before their reference letters arrive, although an actual job offer requires all letters.  (In fact, this is relatively common for more senior applicants, who often want to keep their application confidential as long as possible.)  But that was a policy decision by the department, made with the explicit approval of higher administration.  Other departments and other universities can set their own hiring policies/procedures/requirements.
The overarching rule (according to my understanding of US equal-opportunity labor laws) is that the hiring process must be consistent; the same process must be followed for all applicants.  If you interview one applicant before all their letters arrive, you cannot then claim that you didn't interview a second applicant because you didn't have all their letters.
(I ran my department's faculty hiring committee for three years.)


What does it mean to accept a job offer Related to this question: How to buy plane tickets for job interviews?

What does it mean to accept a job offer? Or maybe more accurately when have you accepted a job offer?

The latest and most conservative might be when you sign a contract. This seems a little late in the game as often contracts, especially in the States are slow to be generated. The earliest might be when you go for an interview. In the UK it is pretty standard for universities to not reimburse candidates to whom offers are made and subsequently turned down. Middle ground might be when you enter contract negotiations or verbally agree to the terms of your contract.

There are many different takes. “Accepting” a job offer is pretty much that: if you tell the person who offered you (your HR contact, the hiring committee, any person of authority in the hiring process) that you accept their offer, that you take the job.

Does it mean there's not turning back? Of course not! The question then becomes: how binding is that agreement? And again, there are answers on many different levels: legal, moral, diplomatic…

Legal: as always, better ask a lawyer, union representative or knowledgeable and trusted friend. Everything depends on the local law, the type of offer made, what you said and/or wrote, etc. It may sound logical that nothing's set in stone until you have signed a contract, but that may not always be the case. Some institutions might, for example, require you to write and sign a binding letter of engagement before the contract is drafted (which, as you said, can take time). In some jurisdiction, the simple fact of showing up for work on the first day of the contract is a binding, implicit contract following the terms of your offer. (Though I would say it should be obvious to all that actually coming to work is pretty binding.)
Moral: that's the most variable of all. Turning down an offer you had accepted orally, because you now have a better offer from some other place, is not wrong in itself. The important thing is: being of good faith, and being diligent to inform them that you have changed your mind. If it turns out that you have accepted the offer, knowing all the while you would end up turning it down, that would be unexcusable.
Diplomatic: people understand the position you're in, as they have most probably been through it themselves some year back. So, they will be sympathetic, as long as they feel you are of good faith, diligent and show acceptable contrition (not sure that's the right term for what I'm trying to describe… let's say you look/sound apologetic enough). Otherwise, well, you risk make enemies and that may not be the best thing to do early in your career.

The fact is: the game is played by both sides. Hiring committees don't dismiss all other candidates immediately when they offer you a position, and they know that Stuff Happens. In a competitive environment such as academia, they surely have a plan B (and probably C and D).

Finally: if that's a tenured or tenure-track position, you'll probably stay very long (life?) there. It's an important choice, and thus you shouldn't find yourself bound by promises made too fast, or you may come to regret it.


Email etiquette for requesting a meeting with a professor who one won't do research with or take a class from? What is the proper etiquette for requesting a meeting with a professor who you don't do research with or take a course from?

Say, the professor is doing something you're interested in, and you just want to talk to them just to learn more about their research (you might be interested in their research out of pure curiosity, or might be wanting to find a possible connection between their research and your potential research). How should one phrase the email?

In particular, I'm interested in trying to find a way to set a particular time for a meeting. Sometimes I ask "are you available next week?" and they say they are, but it's possible that they could be away for most of the week (for unexpected meetings and the like). Should I request a time of my own in a reply? (especially if they don't give a time).

I'm assuming that you are a graduate student.

Simply send a short, polite email expressing that you are interested in his/her research and that you would like to talk about it. If you share a coffee machine, lounge, canteen, etc, you could suggest to talk over coffee. Certainly, say who you are and what you do in the email, and indicate why you are interested.

Don't ramble on in the email. No one has time to read long emails.

Showing interest in research and showing that you won't be wasting his/her time are main points to observe. Most researchers (unless they are ridiculously famous and super busy) would be happy to explain their work and create new avenues for future exploration.


How to handle 2 years hiatus after PhD? One of my friend has a 2-years gap after completing his PhD in 2014, gap due to personal reasons, family-one mainly.

He is now trying to get a postdoc position in electro-engineering.
To me, this two-year gap is hard to justify as he has not produced any relevant papers, nor really gained much sought skills as he had to take care of his family.

I'm not familiar with academia but I'm familiar with recruitment in tech. I advised him to find an angle where he can put his two-years gap in a way that would work for him, instead of letting this 2-years gap being an hindrance.

My question is the following:

  Except to be involved in side projects or do side researchs that he can put on a cv, to help him find a postdoc, are there any other things he can do to make his cv better and make this 2-years hiatus less visible?

Many thanks for your feedback

Universities are often very aware of the equity issues facing academics (usually women) who have career gaps due to family responsibilities such as maternity leave. A two-year hiatus is not ideal, but rather than trying to hide it in a CV, it might work in his favour if he lists it explicitly in his CV, e.g.:
2014-2015: career hiatus due to family care responsibilities.

If he can be clear about what these caring responsibilities entailed, all the better, as people reading it will be more inclined to believe he is not bullshitting. E.g.
2014-2015: career hiatus to to family care responsibilities (primary carer for our baby, now in day care) or (caring for a terminally ill father) or (unavoidable primary care for a mentally ill sister, now recovered).
It will probably help if he can make clear that these care responsibilities are now over, but if not, it is still worth being up-front.

If your friend can add to this by showing evidence of relevant activity during the hiatus, this will help too. Activity could include publishing papers from his PhD or adding to his skills by completing Coursera courses.

While looking for an academic position, your friend should also, if possible, improve his CV by working in a voluntary position in a research group -- perhaps the group with which he did his PhD or someone to whom his PhD supervisor can recommend him. This can usually be listed on the CV as an "adjunct" or "visiting" academic position. While acting in such a voluntary position, he should make sure he impresses the people he is working with to get favourable reference letters and should aim to be doing publishable work.


Using .tex files from arXiv as a template for new papers It is well known that anyone can download the LaTeX source code of the papers on arXiv. My question is regarding the use of that source code.
Say you are working on a paper that is a follow-up to an existing one. You like the format of that paper (both structurally and graphically), and you want to keep the notation used.
Would it be reasonable/legitimate to download the source of the original paper, keep the preamble (i. e., everything before \begin{document}), and then write your own paper? Or is it downright unethical, and akin to plagiarism? Could this be softened by giving credit to the authors of the original paper in the source code (assuming that the new paper is also to be submitted to arXiv)? I am assuming that all of the content of the new paper is original. It is just part of the (not rendered) LaTeX source that is reused with minimal (or no) editing.

In my opinion (as a senior academic, frequent poster on arXiv, and non-lawyer), it is reasonable and legitimate to make use of the source code in the way that you describe except that "giving credit to the authors of the original paper in the source code" is not enough.  You must give credit in the body of the paper itself.  If you do this, I believe that you would be satisfying any of the Creative Commons licenses used by arXiv.  (In the case of one of the enhanced license choices of ShareAlike or Noncommercial-ShareAlike, you should adhere to the additional conditions.)
If you give credit only in the source code, putting legality aside, you would be trying to avoid publicly acknowledging the way in which you have used the work of the original authors.  That is unethical, in my opinion.  (I expect you would agree that well under 0.001% of arXiv downloads are of source files.  Please do not look for the least possible defensible acknowledgment of the original authors.)
If I were in your field and your action led to increased notational and typographic consistency, I would be happy about that.  It would make papers easier to understand.
[Addition to respond to Nate Eldredge:  You make an interesting point that we do not acknowledge Knuth or Lamport or the authors of various standard LaTeX packages.  It does soften my view.  However, I maintain that there is a difference between the `obviously intended use' when someone publishes a LaTeX package and the rather surprising use of someone accessing source code to use macros.  I still recommend that the original questioner acknowledge the use of source code in a way that is visible in the compiled version of the document.]


How to write a personal statement for a "PhD orientation program" (in mathematics)? I'm about to apply for a short "visiting and orientation program" at a large prestigious university where I may be interested in applying for graduate school.

  This program lasts a couple of weeks and consists of

  several courses that present the research done by every research group in the math department;
  meetings with the faculty members and current students.

For the admission, I'm required to submit a statement of purpose.

Now, the scope of statements of purpose written for graduate admission is quite clear: they need to show research potential and experience in an area of interest.

However, I'm confused about what makes a good candidate for a PhD "visiting and orientation program".

  That is, what kind of information, qualification, and motivations may admission committees be looking for in a candidate for such a program?

I speculate as I do not know the faculty and their philosophy.
To my own experiences (PhD 20 years ago, and had some DBA students on my own before I went back to industry), I would suggest you differentiate between research potential and experience against "visiting and orientation". For an orientation program, ...

I would expect people to be open to all directions of learning, in our own as well as in different areas.
The ability to network,
ability for out-of-the box thinking,
ability for telling ideas but also listening.

Think about onion rings around the exploration of your topics.

How do you show those abilities? Examples from your life?


Professor told me up front that she normally doesn't write letters for students who haven't done as much work with her I asked a professor for a letter of recommendation for graduate programs and she mentioned that she normally doesn't write letters for people who haven't done research with her. I took advanced classes of hers and did well though, and she agreed to write the letter, although hesitatingly. She mentioned that she normally only writes letters for people she's known for a while, so even though I did well in her coursework, am just now embarking on research with her, and have a history of tutoring for her class, it doesn't seem to be enough in her eyes. She also mentioned that she would have me write most of it and that she would basically just sign off on it.

Is this a warning sign? Should I turn to someone else to write the essay? A lot of the professors I've had left the university or were not full time professors, which is why I don't think they would be good people to ask for letters, so it's really hard for me to find recommenders right now that would be appropriate. Any advice would be appreciated.

Edit: Wanted to clarify that she seems like she had good intentions--she was willing to expand more on my teaching and ability to convey higher level concepts to new students, but that this type of letter is not the kind of letter she normally writes. Having seen the opinions of everyone, what is a good way to gauge whether or not she actually wants to write the letter?

Suggesting that you write the letter and she will just sign it could be the professor's way to drive home the message that she does not want to write this letter of recommendation. I feel she is really unwilling to write the letter and probably hesitatingly agreed either because you were insistent or because she felt an outright refusal might seem rude. It would be better not to push her to do something that she does not want to. In your place, I would definitely look for another professor.


Can an international PhD Student in Australia make a living with an APA scholarship and 8 hours teaching work per week? My "problem":

I am from Austria and currently in the process of applying for a PhD position in Brisbane, Australia. My supervisors said that I might be eligible for an
APA (Australian Postgraduate Awards) stipend which is supposed to cover my living expenses in AUS. Receiving this scholarship would also mean that I wouldn't be paying any tuition fees.
The total stipend amount is 26,288 AU$ / year. And as far as I know, I would be allowed to work up to 8 hours a week to earn some extra money (I.e. as a teaching assitant).
I don't know how much the hourly rates for this type of job are, but if I speculate and say it's about 20AUS$/h, this would result in a total weekly budget of approximately 660AU$ (including wage and scholarship).

My question:

Can I make a living with this amount of money in an expensive city like Brisbane? Could I maybe even safe up some money to fly back to Europe once a year to visit my family and friends?
Any experiences or useful links of (international) PhD Students in Australia are appreciated (I.e. on insurance costs, etc.).

Note: I know that the Australian Government says that the average living expenses per year are AU$18,610, but they don't explicitly state how they calculate this sum. When I checked the costs for housing, food, insurance, etc., the sum exceeded this official number by far.

I'm a current PhD student at the University of Melbourne. I can just support myself and one other person on my $30,000 of scholarships. I also live with just my partner (no housemates), our rent is just under $400/week + bills. So if you are OK with a more student-like experience you are likely to be fine, and use TA work to save for flights you need to take back to Europe.

Your estimate is quite low for TA work: the minimum wage for casual cafe or fast-food workers in Australia is over $22/hr. I get $44/hr for TAing, though this may just be Melbourne Uni. Also scholarships are tax-free, meaning you may not have to pay any income tax (as it would be nearly impossible to earn over the $18200 tax-free threshold given visa restrictions).


Is there a preferred citation style for computer science papers? Is there a preferred/standard/popular citation style within the computer science field? By citation style, I'm referring to these three general methods:

Using #'s, like [1] or [6,7]
Using short strings like [SM15] or [Bob14]
Using author-date style, like (Smith, 2015).

Browsing through the recent CS submissions on arXiv.org shows a roughly 50/50 split between options (1) and (3) above, with the occasional (2).

So I really have two questions:

Which citation method best communicates "this is a computer science paper"?
Which citation method best communicates what's actually being referenced?

(The answer to both may be the same, but I can imagine, e.g., something like "Everyone uses '[1]', even though 'Smith (2015)' is clearly easier to read.")

Regarding your Q1: Both ACM and IEEE use citation style #1 -- "[1]", so it's safe to say that most readers of academic articles in CS are most familiar with that style.  Therefore, if you use style #1, your paper will look similar to most conference and journal articles in CS.

Regarding your Q2: it is my experience that citation style #3 -- "Smith (2015)" -- is most effective for the reader.  This opinion is shaped by my department -- Computational Social Science -- so I read a mix of papers from CS, Statistics, Social Science, Economics, and others.

My reason for favoring #3 is that it makes it easier to read the paper in line.  Having read many papers in a given field, I am familiar with the most cited and most seminal work.  If I see "Padgett and Powell (2012)", I immediately know what that reference is, or I can guess.  But if I see "[5]", it tells me nothing.  I have to go look at the reference list, then memorize that "[5]" stands for "Padgett and Powell (2012)" every time I see it.

But the nature of the discipline and the nature of the paper lead to some differences in the role citations serve in the text.  In Social Sciences in general, citations have a structural in the discourse in a field.  Citations often mark schools of thought, lines of argument, or research lenses.  In contrast, in Computer Science citations have a much more utilitarian function -- they point to papers that provide theoretical foundations, that attempted other approaches to the problem, that solved sub-problems, and so on.  In a way, these are the intellectual "bill of materials" for the research behind the CS paper.  The numbered references are sufficient for this, giving anyone pointers to the "bill of materials" should they need them.

Another justification for citation style #1 is to shorten the page count for papers.  In my opinion, this is less and less justified in an era where most people read papers electronically, not in print.


Is there an advantage of branching in version-controlled paper writing? I use a version control system (formerly subversion, now git) to write papers, which for me works very well and is convenient. A few times, I even worked with branches for different logical versions of a paper, such as versions submitted to different journals. However, I found branching of little use for paper writing. When I used different branches for different journal submissions, I found myself working only on the "latest" branch anyway, since I can anyway only submit one version per time, and, if it is rejected, will not continue to work on that particular version at a later time. I didn't find any other good use of branching in paper writing, and later skipped it completely.

Is there any advantage of working with several branches when writing a paper with a version control system? How should one organize the writing process in order to profit from such an advantage?

I use HG, but it is essentially the same as GIT, in that branching is easy. I branch all the time when working with coauthors. The branches tend to be short lived and merged pretty quickly. Basically, I distribute a copy to my coauthors and each set of comments I get back form different branches. This lets me see each authors comments individually. I then work on merging the comments back into the main trunk. Sometimes the merge is easy and the branch is one commit long. Other times it might take longer if I need to work out something (e.g., math, model, or analysis) which might require a couple of revisions before it is ready to go into the main trunk.


Citing a work authored by “A. Smith with B. Jones” I have a book, for simplicity’s sake let’s say it’s written by “A. Smith with B. Jones”. Note the with, not and. This how the authorship is credited both on the cover and inside the book.

This is because one of the writers did by far the majority of the work. So, how should I cite it? I am considering the following options:

In-text citation:

  (Smith & Jones, p. 11)

  (Smith with Jones, p. 11)

Reference:

  Smith, A. & B. Jones 2020. A book's title. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

  Smith A. with B. Jones 2020. A book's title. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

The main point of citation style is to allow the reader to identify and find the work in question, not to please the authors, correctly represent their contributions in detail, or reproduce how the authors were listed on the publication in absolute detail.
In fact, hardly any publication has equal contributions.
Probably the only reason we do not see other conjunctions very often is that most citations are to papers where the journals control the style and nip any trend towards this in the bud.

On the other hand, the odd with may be confuse the reader. Consider:

  Smith with Jones (2020) established …

As a reader, my first assumption would be that you made a mistake and I consider the following “corrections” equally likely:

  Smith & Jones (2020) established …
  Smith (unknown year) with Jones (2020) established …

Hence: Ignore this peculiarity for citing. It does not hinder the reader to identify or find the paper. It is only confusing and unnecessarily complicates things.

Some illustrative examples leading the alternative ad absurdum:

In a paper with alphabetical author ordering, you do not try to figure out who contributed most and name them when citing. Not only would this often be unfeasible if not impossible to find out, it would also strongly harm the identifiability and searchability of your reference. Aaronson’s contribution to “Aaronson et al.” may be minor; they were just the first in the alphabet.
If a paper has co-first-authorship (“these authors contributed equally”) and further authors, you still cite it by only naming the original first author. Taylor may be a co-first author with Williams on “Taylor et al.”.
You can imagine arbitrary complex authorship phrases. Would you honour the following?

  A. Smith together with B. Jones and some contributions of C. Taylor as well as a chapter by D. Williams

Depending on the journal’s style, a paper by the same group of authors may list them as:

  A. Smith, B. Jones, C. Taylor, and D. Williams
  A. SMITH¹, B. JONES¹², C. TAYLOR³⁴, D. WILLIAMS¹⁵⁶
  A. Sᴍɪᴛʜ*, B. Jᴏɴᴇs†, C. Tᴀʏʟᴏʀ§, & D. Wɪʟʟɪᴀᴍs♠ [sorry for Unicode abuse]

This should not affect your citation the slightest.

The only exception I can think of is if you are Jones and this is your CV, which should humbly reflect that your contribution was only minor.


Is there any difference between one-year MScs and two-years MScs? I am currently intending to apply for a master degree in Health/Clinical Psychology. I would like to ask if there is any difference in terms of qualification between an one-year MSc and a two-year one, that is, if they are recognised as of same value in any possible field of application. If not then what are the differences between them?

I am not sure about your field, and it also probably varies by university, but generally one year MScs are just course based, professional degrees that offer little to no funding (Meaning you pay out of pocket). Two year degrees, on the other hand, generally are thesis based degrees, are often funded (not as often as PhDs). Sometimes 2 year MScs are also course based, but I would look at credit requirements. Some schools offer programs where you can do the equivalent of a 2 year program in 1 year (non thesis based).

In my field, Earth Sciences, a 1 year or 2 year non thesis based MSc is generally reserved for people who want to teach in High school (USA) or their company wants them to brush up on some new techniques in the field. Those who want to go on to a PhD program, or, get a high paying industry job (in oil/gas) tend to do thesis based degrees to be competitive.

So more credits = better degree. Thesis = better degree. In general, of course.


Do referee lists of journals compromise the single-blind peer-review process? Many journals maintain a preface in their print versions (usually available online) where they list those people who acted as a referee for the current issue.

Does this compromise the anonymity of the peer-review process? As an author you could get a good guess who reviewed your paper from such lists even though you cannot pin it down to a single individual.

Why are such lists maintained? Is there a reason not to bother about it?

Bear in mind that many papers are reviewed without being published, and that no one knows everyone who could potentially be a reviewer of their paper. So you may guess, but you really can't do so with certainty.

I think a bigger issue in this regard is the shepherding process done in some conferences, in which one person who served as a reviewer interacts directly with the authors to verify that concerns from the reviews are addressed.  Now you know who a reviewer was, just not which review they wrote.  Such conferences often have 5-7 reviews per accepted paper, but I've seen it done with as few as 3.

In either case, I think the possible unblinding of a reviewer is a minor concern. You really ought to be writing the public portion of reviews as though the authors know exactly who is reviewing (this came up in another question recently) and some reviewers choose to sign their reviews explicitly as a matter of principle.


What title to put in CV if you do research but unfunded? As the title suggested, if you have been doing research consistently with a professor, can you write RA as your title in CV? If not, what should be the title to put there instead to show that you have done research in that lab? Thanks a lot.

If you are a student at a university it's probably unwise to claim to have a title there if you don't have it. Simply putting 'student' is probably better. On the other hand, many departments have unpaid, "zero hour" appointments if you really want an official title.

If you're not at a university and you fund yourself I suppose you can technically give yourself whatever title you want, but "independent researcher" would seem like a fitting description.


How much can I quote a research article before I infringe on copyright? I have 400 words of quoted and lightly paraphrased material from a scientific journal article. Would it be infringing copyright to share this on the internet? Note: most of the material is also cited by the one article I am citing.
Maybe I should go back to the original sources and quote them individually so as to avoid such a large amount coming seemingly from the same article? Would that matter? What are the rules?

If this is a legal question, the answer is "it depends". On jurisdiction, for one. And you can look into the 4-factor test of Fair Use if you live in the US. The "substantial portion" question is going to be most relevant here (are you citing so much that there's no point in reading the original paper any more?), and maybe the amount of commentary you surround your quotes with. This kind of use is generally only determined to be infringing or non-infringing on a case-by-case basis by the court, so there is no true answer to your question short of getting sued to determine it.

If it's just a practical question, then I don't think anyone is currently pursuing DMCA claims for quoting portions of papers, and if you make it clear who wrote the text, it's also not plagiarism (which you haven't asked about but noting it just in case).


As temporary faculty, how to deal with a colleague who, via email, questions agreements made in a meeting? I'm on a short-term contract with a local state university.  I have been teaching there as an adjunct for a while, but a full-time faculty needed to take emergency leave so I was asked to cover their courses.

As part of my full-time responsibilities, I was asked to a meeting for some administrative work that I know something about.  There were four faculty members: the head of department, a recently tenured faculty, and a tenure-track faculty.  During the meeting we divided up the work and said we'd meet in two weeks or so to review it.

There was some discussion about who did what, but the recently tenured faculty said very little.

The next day, that recently-tenured faculty sent an email saying that they had "felt uncomfortable" with how the work was assigned and had a "clear vision" about the part of the work that I had volunteered for.  As I said, the recently-tenured faculty said very little during the meeting and seemed to agree with the outcome.

In addition to the four people who were at the meeting, this email was CCed to the Dean and the rest of the department.

Coming from a commercial, rather than academic, background I found this behavior disturbing and unprofessional.

My full-time contract ends at the end of the calendar year, but I am wondering if you have any advice regarding how I should deal with this  recently-tenured faculty apart from doing the work that I was asked to do during the meeting?  I'd rather have nothing to do with them and, were they in a commercial environment, they would probably be on a PIP (performance improvement plan).

The head of department has been supportive.  The Dean has not weighed in.

Actually, I would ignore it. It is fairly typical behavior among some faculty. It might not even be abuse, but just the other person having time to reflect after the meeting. If the comments made were on-topic and not a personal attack, then you have nothing to gain in your current position by doing anything beyond arguing for your position. It could even be that the other person is uncomfortable in meeting generally.

I once found that offering suggestions for improvement of policy, as a new faculty member, is sometimes definitely not appreciated. I suffered setbacks because I suggested that "the way we do things here" was counterproductive. People don't like to hear that from a new person or an underling.

But yielding graciously, even if you don't feel it, could put you in a better position for future employment there.

On the other hand, you are justified in responding to a personal attack, but do so through "channels".


Why do Russian and Israeli universities score low in various world rankings? Russia and Israel have good histories of science and technology.

But, I never saw any Russian and Israeli university in the top 50 list.

Currently, the top Russian university, according to QS World Ranking is, Lomonosov Moscow State University. Its position is 114. This is far worse than China. The top Chinese university Tsinghua has a position of 47. The same problem can be seen in Israeli universities.

Why do Russian and Israeli universities score low in various world rankings?

What is the problem? And, why aren't they trying to improve the situation?

          |--------|-----------|--------------|-----------------|-----------
          |QS(2015)|Times(2015)|Shanghai(2014)|Webometrics(2014)|CWUR(2014)
----------|--------|-----------|--------------|-----------------|-----------
  Russia  |   114  |    196    |      84      |       129       |    48**
----------|--------|-----------|--------------|-----------------|-----------
  Israel  |   138  |    188    |      70      |       207       |    22**
----------|--------|-----------|--------------|-----------------|-----------

** this ranking is an exception.

Why do Russian and Israeli universities score low in various world rankings?
  What is the problem? And, why aren't they trying to improve the situation?

As a researcher originally from a country in a similar situation (Austria - historically great, Nobel prize winning researchers - now all universities ranked in the far 3-digit range in most rankings), I can try to speculate. Note that, of course, reasons may differ between Russia and Israel, or between institutions, so there may easily just not be the reason for this phenomenon.

Most rankings are perceived as garbage. Not scoring highly is not perceived as a big deal that needs changing. Unlike in the US and other places, students generally don't care about rankings, and neither do employers. Hence, historically, the universities simply did not care whether they were top-something or not. I think this was the big reason historically in Austria, but it is slowly beginning to change due to top-down pressure from the government. Note that, even today, local students and employers still don't care about rankings, but foreign students and funding sources do, so there is at least some incentive to do something about it.
Most rankings are actually kind of garbage. Many universities outside of the US simply are not as bad as their ranking suggests. Most rankings are either extremely top-heavy in their criteria and hence not very good at distinguishing the 50-best university from the 200-best in a field (e.g., counting Nobel prize winners), or implicitly assume that universities loosely follow the US way of organisation and naming. For instance, my alma mater has historically lost many points in some rankings due to an insanely bad faculty/student ratio. However, this was really mainly due to in Austria only chaired full professors being considered "real" faculty (called "Professorenkollegium"). Hence, the way of counting underestimated the real number of teachers available to students by a factor of 4 or 5. This has, afaik, been fixed by now, but an implicit bias for an US style of organization is still prevalent in many rankings. Further, unlike US universities, there are very little efforts in Austrian universities to tune their numbers for specific rankings. Generally, close to nobody at your average Austrian university has any idea what even the big rankings are looking at.
Being historically good does not mean that the universities are still good. Decades of underfunding for research have severely reduced the quality of research that is being produced. Both things above considered, one has to assert that all the "historically great" universities in Austria aren't actually great anymore. Decades of underfunding, neglect by politicians, and questionable hiring practices for professors have certainly led to big, fundamentally detrimental changes to the university culture. At this point, Austrian universities are still pretty good at teaching students, and there is still reasonable research going on, but it would be wrong to assume that any university actually deserves to be considered on the same (research) tier with top English or US schools. I am pretty sure that at least in Russia, long-lasting underfunding will also be a big reason why the schools don't show up more prominently in rankings.


Is there any automated way I can detect if a co-author plagiarized before our paper is submitted? My professor, a co-author and I have been working on a paper for more than a year. I was doing the math and simulations, my co-author was responsible for the writing, and my professor was editing the paper. Now editing of the paper is done. Unfortunately, the co-author is no longer available. My professor called me today and told me he has observed that my co-author copied some sentences from the reference papers. So he asked me to check all of the sentences and highlight and rewrite them again if I found that they were copied. He believes that, these days the reviewers are more concerned about the use of similar sentences in the paper.

So, What should I do? Check all sentences with other papers? This is not possible without using a machine. the paper contains more than 8000 words. Do you know what software I can use to do this?

I am both confused and concerned about the description of your work process:

  I was doing the math and simulations, my co-author was taking the care of writing and my professor was editing the paper.

It seems clear you are making a contribution worthy of authorship, but as for your "co-author" and professor, it is not clear if their contributions are worthy of authorship. the fact that the co-author is unavailable make the situation difficult. High end plagiarism detection software is still not particularly good and I would be hesitant about using any work written by someone who is known to have plagiarised in the past, especially in the absence of drafts to confirm the absence of plagiarism.

The issue with using software like TurnItIn is not its abilitity to detect and parse copied material, but the limitations on its underlying database. Plagiarism detection software generally does not have access to non-open access publications. If your co-author copied from non-open access publications, then the software will likely miss it. A publishers, like elsivier Edith a large amount of pay walled material may add their own publications to their database making it easy for them to catch the plagiarism.

My suggestion would be to rewrite all the material by the co-author. You could either work from his version and maintain his authorship, or if his only contribution was the writing as you say, then rewrite those sections from scratch and drop him from the list of authors.


What is the legal status of using copyrighted images in academic/conference talks? I am told that we can use copyrighted images in our lectures to students now as they are for purely educational purposes, as long as we correctly attribute them. That is to say there is no need to ask the permission of the copyright holders.

What is the status of using copyrighted images in conference talks? Does it also count as education?

As pointed out, this will depend on the country in which the talk is given. Let me restrict the question to the US and UK in that case. If anyone knows the situation in another country then it would be great to hear that too of course.

In the UK, the reason why I suggested you could use copyrighted material in lectures without asking permission was http://lti.lse.ac.uk/copyright/copyright-2014.php#education .

Legal status can vary by country, content and sometimes even - the intended audience.

In many places you are allow to use otherwise copyrighted materials within fair use, e.g a figure from a paper.

For things, which are not directly relevant to talk (e.g. "let's put a nice stock image of a man with a plant") the story may be different.

In any case:

from the practical perspective, you are unlikely to go to jail (or even: getting fined) for showing copyrighted images in an academic talk,
from the legal perspective, unless you are a lawyer (or your country has a very clear law on copyright) you are unlikely to know wether is is legal or not.

Highly relevant:

Can I use images showing up in Google search for my presentation slides without violating any copyright?


Searching for collaborators in a specific university My university has signed a cooperation agreement with a different university overseas, and we are encouraged to find potential collaborators in that university. I looked at the university's website, but could not find an easily searchable index of the faculty members by their research topics (I can go to the homepage of each and every faculty member and check, but they are very many).

Is there a way to do such a search in a tool such as Google Scholar? In particular, can I search in Google Scholar for papers with certain keywords, with the constraint that one of the authors should have a specific affiliation? Such a search could lead me to a very focused list of potential collaborators.

Web of Science can do this to some extent.

Go to Web of Science and search the keyword in "topic".
After getting results, refine by funding agencies and look for the institution you want.

I'm not sure how comprehensive this is, though.


How to politely request payment for extra hours of TA service rendered? My TA letter indicates 90 hours working. However, I worked for 120 hours due to the volume of the students. Now my work is finished I want to let them know by writing an email to the professor. I want to be nice and thankful for the given position.

Note, my goal is to get paid for these 30 hours. I had already raised the issue with the professor before doing the work, and was told to do the work, record my hours, and then the professor would follow up with the head of department.

Your letter seems perfectly polite. My one critique is that I'm not clear what you're asking for. Just to get your record updated? A larger assignment going forward? More money for the hours you put in already? I assume the last one (getting paid for those 30 hours), but I'm not sure. If you're struggling for words, you could call this a "stipend adjustment" or something like that.

It is good that you got approval before working these hours. If you had not (as the comments and other answers have noted), you would have very little chance of getting retroactively compensated. Hopefully you got a clear commitment in writing: there is still a chance this will be messy if the professor does not or cannot follow through on their promise to find extra funding for you.