Getting secondary citations right I have some questions regarding secondary citations (in an computer-science research paper that should be published in a journal). I know that they should be avoided when possible, but it is not always that easy. More specifically, my situation is this:

Article A says:

  The average value of ... in ... is ... [B]. [C]’s study says that in ... the value is ...

This statement is exactly what i need for my paper.
If I read [B] and [C], I see that [A] cited them correctly and if I would have found these two other articles myself, I would have written the same.

Now how to cite this in a correct way?

  [B] and [C] say (cited in [A]) ...

and do a “bad” secondary quote;

  [B] and [C] say ...

and neglect the investigation done by [A] and peform citation plagiarism;

  [A] says ...

and neglect that the data was the achievement of [B] and [C].

  [A] says based on the findings of [B] and [C] ...

and do a secondary quote again.

If you write about something originally stated in B and C, you should always read B and C to make sure that's actually what they said (which you say you've done) and cite them. (This rules out Option 3.)

Whether or not to cite A depends on how you use A.

You are using intellectual content from A (the interpretation/summary of B and C), so you should cite A also. (Another example of this is How to cite the original source of an algorithm and a secondary source that provides a clearer description of the algorithm?). Option 4 indicates clearly what content comes from A and what comes from B and C, so it's a good way to cite it.
If you weren't using any intellectual content (interpretation, summarization, curation of references) from A, but just happened to come by B and C via A, you may not need to cite A (see e.g. Is there a problem with citing the original source instead of the source where the information was first found?). However, based on your description, you are using A's interpretation, so that rules out Option 2.

The links (1,2) you have given to support your assertion that secondary citations are "bad" are being misinterpreted. Both of those advise against the practice of only citing the secondary source and not also tracking down the original. The third link you brought up (3) says not to use A's statements about B and C without citing A (Option 2).


Is hiring a proofreader beneficial in the long term? I am an Early Stage Researcher in a bigger project. I am non-native speaker of English and I find my level of English in my articles not satisfactory, especially when I consider that it is not just my reputation but also the reputation of the project.

I am thinking about hiring a proofreader for my future articles or other texts for publication.

My long term goal is to improve myself enough so I would not need a proofreader in the future. Does the possibility to see your corrected text help you improve your writing skill in the long term, or are English classes necessary?

What improves most your English level (or help you maintain it if you have reached a certain level which you deem satisfactory) is usage of the language in all its forms: listening, speaking, reading, writing. This is especially easy in this age of globalization and technology: just keep reading texts of all kinds, listening to the radio, watching TV programs in original language (BBC news, series, …), professional podcasts or videocasts, etc.

In addition, comparing the proofread text of articles with your original version can help you better understand some of the mistakes you make, the invalid constructions you may use and
the shibboleths that give you away as a non-native speaker. However, unless you write (and get proofread) a large number of papers, this might not be enough to improve significantly.

Another possibility is to pay a teacher to actually review with you, on a regular basis, texts that you have written. Although it takes quite a bit of time, I believe it is one of the best ways to improve your written English, along with reading a lot.


How beneficial a literature survey article would be if it's about gender gap? I am an undergraduate in physics and I am doing a literature survey project that highlights the gender gap in some specific field of research. My professor asked me to visit google scholar and related sites(specific to that research field) where I get the research papers year-wise and do the survey on a number of male and female authors by name, year, and the country as well. Since I haven't done any survey work before, to go through each paper on a site and then copy-paste the names on excel and search their names and gender seems like an eternity of work. I am aware that it's an empowering project but still, I am alone at work, he gave me two months' time. I don't want to spend my time in something only to find it insignificant in future.
How beneficial would this literature survey article would be to my research career if it's about gender gap?  Considering I am Physics student.
And if anyone has done one such project, please tell some tools/tips which can make it a little easier, including one in excel. It would be a great help.

Google seems to have gone out of its way to make the results on google scholar difficult to access with a program.
That said, there are many tools that automate some of what you are painfully doing by hand. The results can be imported into excel.
Search for scrape google scholar.
You would certainly need this kind of literature search to think about the extent of a gender gap in the indexed publications. Making sense of the data would be hard. What reliable method might you use to determine the genders of authors?


Is there a better measure of undergraduate academic performance than GPA? An answer to a recent question about the importance of looking at a student's whole transcript got me thinking.  Is there some other way of summing up a student's academic performance, other than the GPA?  Something that would distinguish among the three types of 3.5 students described in Jake's answer:

  This student is pretty steady, but not great, and tends to get an even mix of As and Bs across all of their classes, obtaining a 3.5 GPA.
  This student always takes the class with the easiest grading policy whenever they can, and tends to get mostly As in the "easy" classes. When they cannot evade a "hard" class, they get mostly Cs, resulting in a 3.5 GPA.
  This student is very strong and gets mostly As, but there was one semester when family problems disrupted their life, and missed assignments caused them to get Bs and two Fs, also ending up with a 3.5 GPA.

In other words, is there a way of summarizing a student's transcript, that doesn't ignore so many important details?

I suspect that incorporating just class rank doesn't help much (an anecdotal, subjective contribution): my high school allowed one to choose to take classes with credit/no credit (C/NC).  I chose to be graded with letter grades for a handful of classes, and received A's in all of those.  I suspect this may have been why I graduated with a laughably high class rank.

I believe that there cannot be any single numerical statistic or small set of such statistics that summarizes the nature of a student well.

The first reason for my assessment is that there are too many different ways one may wish to use information about a student, and too many ways that a student can have an unusual background that will not fit into those boxes well.  The second reason is that any metric, once established, can (and will) be optimized against, thereby undermining its value.

Summarizing a student on one or a few metrics is no better than the much-bemoaned practices of judging faculty for tenure by a few metrics.


How to write a research statement for a math postdoc position? I am a graduate student in mathematics working on functional analysis of quantum information (basically using matrix techniques in some well-known problems). I am presently applying for postdoctoral positions (in both Mathematics and Quantitative Physics departments). However, I am not getting any reply from most of the places and got a few rejection letters as well. Since I am from Mathematics, I cannot apply to experimental groups (where there are more openings). Again, being a Mathematics student and working in Physics (even though there are obvious connections between them) is not seen as a good example among certain parts of the physics community and the majority of the Mathematicians in this part of the world (personal opinion based on certain bitter experiences). I do not know whether it is the same in other places as well.

I feel that I have not projected myself by writing a good research statement. I have written it after reading the first few entries of Google search results as well as advice from the AMS. I have mostly highlighted my present work, with only a short discussion of future ideas.

To make my life more complicated, I want to move out of the present problems which I am working presently and choose some new problems for my postdoctoral research. I have a peripheral knowledge about the works of different groups. However, modifying my research statement according to the research work of each group is, I think, difficult (as I need to spend time to read their works and spot exactly where my knowledge can be used in their problems and so on). The reason for not having time is I am simultaneously working on some research problem as well as writing my thesis, which I need to submit in the coming months.

In this situation, how do I write a good research statement? I want to convey the message to potential employers that, while I have not done research on their problem yet (though I know them to certain level), given an opportunity I can learn and do work in their areas.

Writing a postdoctoral research statement should not be a huge exercise. Unless you are applying for a major postdoctoral fellowship, I would not necessarily expect a huge research statement. In many cases, in fact, you may not need a research statement at all to apply for a postdoctoral appointment; a cover letter, CV, and list of references may suffice. (When I hired my current postdoctoral associate, those were the materials I asked for.)

Now, that said, your statement should provide a few pieces of information:

A brief description of your current project, and any major research skills or tools you have acquired as a result of your training.
A brief summary of the kinds of problems you would like to study as a postdoctoral associate. If these are aligned with the interests of the group you are applying to, this is even more helpful.

Ultimately, however, when you are applying for a postdoctoral position, you are applying to a specific individual, who will be the one reviewing the applications. What I am looking for is someone who has actually responded to my job posting, not just a job posting. That means I want to see a clear statement that the applicant has thought about what we do in my group, and how her skills will contribute to the project for which I'm advertising. If there's no such indication, I'm much less likely to take the application seriously, unless there are mitigating factors (lots of publications in top journals, strong recommendation letters from colleagues I know, and so on).

Finally, I should also point out that the quality of your written English could be improved. While this might seem to be a minor issue, a poorly written statement can be enough for me as an advisor to think twice about hiring someone, simply because I would worry about my ability to communicate with the candidate. (Furthermore, someone whose communication skills are somewhat deficient will have a harder time finding a position than someone proficient.)


What's the difference between a preprint and a working paper? I'd always thought they were completely the same, but I saw a twitter thread in which this was questioned.

I mean here "working paper" only in its scholarly sense - I'm aware that the term has other uses, for instance at the UN where it can mean something akin to the draft of a resolution.

If the answer is that there is a meaningful difference in some disciplines but not in others, which disciplines treat the term differently?

As per the other (current) answer, in fields I know (pure and applied math, computing, GIS, ...) a working paper is less mature than a preprint. However, there is not necessarily a progression from one to the other.

The expectation is that a preprint is basically ready for submission to peer-reviewed journal or other venue, and may even already be submitted by the time anyone else reads it. In some cases, that may not be strictly true: I've seen working papers where there was a specific clear gap or two that still needed to be filled before submission, and I've myself had to rework preprints significantly based on friendly feedback received and/or different format/length expectations where ultimately submitted.

In fields I know, "working paper" carries connotations of work-in-progress. It may still be under active development, or paused to be revisited much later, or maybe never. But someone feels it is worth sharing and having in citable form regardless of any half-bakedness. Nothing wrong with that, and during my Ph.D. I was strongly influenced by a working paper that outlined an approach the author never got around to completing.


Is there any way to avoid wasting a long time in review process for mathematics journals? I sent two different articles to two different mathematics journal. The fist one review process is 6 months(accepted). The second one is still under review(14 months ago) and it may be rejected. A third one took 9 months and editor said
"... the topic/content of your study is outside our journal's area of interest, we regret to inform you that we are unable to consider your manuscript for publication"
My questions

Is there any way to avoid time wasting in review process?
Are there journals with fast reviewing process?

Are there journals with fast reviewing process?

The really quick ones are the "questionable" journals ... every paper is accepted, and published (for a hefty fee).

The Notices of the American Mathematical Society publishes a survey once a year, which includes information on mathematics journals, including statistics on time from submission to publication (when available).

added

"Backlog of Mathematics Research Journals"
Notices of the AMS, Volume 61, Number 10,
November 4, 2014, page 1268.


Including critical feedback about a course on exam paper There was a subject in our university, regarding Web Designing.  Under that, we were given a group assignment to build a website using HTML, CSS and PHP(we were allowed to use additional technologies as well if we wanted).

However,most of us felt like that we were not given enough practical guidance, because that was the first group project we were given with technical aspects in the university and though the lecturers tried to deliver their best the workload was too heavy even they failed to teach anything beyond the ones given in learning materials(textbooks).  There were sessions to discuss the issues with the teaching staff, but the time windows allocated were not enough as there were too many groups.  Under those circumstances, most of the groups were frustrated and it even affected the assignments in other subjects as well.

Eventually, the websites we built were evaluated in a VIVA and our website was unfinished at the deadline. (the marks given were never disclosed to the students).

When we were given the written paper for the final exam, after answering the questions as much as I can, I wrote a note to the examiner at the end of my answer sheet, criticizing the subject content being too heavy and the lack of attention towards the groups' progress.  I got a good grade for that particular subject in the end, but have never received personal feedback regarding the note I wrote.

Now looking back at the incident, I feel like I should have tried harder for the assignment, but I am still unclear whether that piece of criticism was suitable or not as I believe someone should have made a point.

The issue is we keep getting more subjects with heavy workloads and low content organization like that as the degree is being progressed and there is no proper objection from the students.

My questions are,

Was my action appropriate?
How to tackle such situations if they arise in future?

A note in your exam will most likely be disregarded.  There are a number of channels for feedback, this will vary according to university.  Feedback forms at the end of the course is the most common but you can reach out to your faculty administration and they should be able to provide you a form.

You can also try to approach your professor directly: be courteous and to the point.  Remember that they're probably overloaded and they're doing the best they can in the circumstances.

Having said all this.  I have to say that most university courses are meant to be introductory courses.  That is the purpose is to give you an overview of the basic theory and the possibilities in a given subject. No course will ever be complete, even if you take advanced courses.

In practical courses such as the one you mention your best bet is practical experience: by yourself, through an internship, etc.  This is something you can do (by yourself) now that you have been given the overview at the course.


Pros and cons of publishing in a journal not indexed in SCI but under ESCI? A Journal is indexed in Scopus and Web of Science. But under Web of science it is under Emerging sources citation index and not under SCI or SCI expanded. What are the pros and cons of publishing in it if you are a serious researcher looking for phd admission? Its not predatory for sure and no charges for author whats so ever. Its also from a reputed publisher. The feild is applied mathematics

I'm guessing that where you are in your career it matters very little. The important thing is to get published in a reputable journal. I also doubt that experienced scholars worry very little about such things.

Pick a journal that seems appropriate for your work. Send it off. Then write the next paper.

And if you are not yet in a doctoral program, then publishing is a big win, no matter where, as long as the journal is reputable.


How to sign copyright form in ManuscriptCentral website Does anybody know how can I sign the copyright form in ManuscriptCentral website?

The portal provided an online form as the copyright form to sign.

Just write your name and surname in the signature field, and select the date. That's it.


How much help should one expect from their PhD advisor to get a job (academic or industry)? How much help can one expect from their PhD advisor to get a job (academic or industry)? Is it true that graduates often get positions just by having their advisor make a "phone call"?

I think it's reasonable to expect a PhD advisor to make introductions but not to place you into jobs.
They should help introduce you to people at conferences, both directly 1 to 1 or by supporting you in getting opportunities to present.
They should introduce you to visiting professors when they come to tour your space/give a talk to your department.
They should involve you in collaborations, to expose you to more ongoing research as well as researchers.
When it's time to apply for a job, you should make the phone call (or often an email). The introductions you've already had let you start the conversation with something like:

Hi, I'm Professor Maxwell's student, we met at the Demons Conference last year. I'm graduating this year and looking for post doc positions...

For industry jobs, I think it depends on your lab and your advisor. For some labs, your advisor has industry as well as academic contacts, because you collaborate with industry or work in a field where industry researchers are found at the same conferences as academics; in that case, all of the above still applies. For others, I would expect you would need to do more outside networking on your own, and I would look more to the rest of your institution for the same sort of networking support, through job fairs and such.
In some locations and cultures, yes, maybe a phone call is all you need, but in others people would be offended by that approach. The phone call that is more important to get you a job, though, goes the other way: it's when the future employer calls your advisor after hearing from you, and asks them what they think of you.


Can I be admitted to a graduate program in Computer Science with relevant work experience, but academic background in Electronic Engineering? As mentioned, I have an undergraduate degree in Electronic Engineering but my work experience (>3 years) is in server-side software development including development of horizontally scalable and distributed services. I am interested in getting a graduate degree in Computer Science. However, most of the programs I have looked at require an undergraduate degree with computer science courses. There are a few programs that do not have this requirement and I shall be applying for.

My question is; will it be possible for me to prove my eligibility purely on the basis of my work experience and thus get admitted into a graduate program? I am fairly confident that I have (most of) the required skill-set and knowledge base and that I can catch up on the rest easily.

There are cases where you can get admitted even though you have another (closely related) degree because some programs give students a chance to study things on their own, though this usually varies between countries and universities.

Another thing that could affect your chances is the type of computer science that you want to apply for: it's probably going to be difficult to get into a theoretical computer science program (some of my colleagues at my current university have been rejected from a computer science master's program at a respected university because their undergraduate degrees contain the word "engineering"), but it might be easier to get into some more applied field.

The best thing would be to contact someone at your target universities; they are usually able to tell you if you have a chance to be admitted.

Hope this helps and good luck.


Undergraduate transcript for graduate addmission If your undergraduate degree transcript shows that you failed one subject, and in the other you barely passed but still you have a good WAM (say 85) or GPA (say 6.5 out of 7), would those two subjects in your transcript destroy your chances of being admitted?

To be more specific, I graduated last year with a combined degree (Electrical engineering and Mathematics). I got 40 in Digital Fundamentals and 61 in physics. These two subjects were first year, first semester subjects of my undergraduate. All my other grades were greater than 85. My current GPA is 6.8 (out of 7) and my WAM (weighted average mark) is 86 (out of 100). The second time that I did digital fundamentals, I got 96.

I am planning to do a phd in electrical engineering.

You're not going to like this, but the answer is, "it depends."

If you flunked computer science, it'll be hard to find a CS program that will take you.  If you flunked underwater basket weaving and want admission to a CS program, well, that might work.  If "failed one subject" means "failed one course," that might not be too bad.  If it means "never passed even one history course, " not so much.

It also depends on how long it's been since you were an undergraduate.  Admissions committees understand that people mature and that a poor showing in the distant past doesn't necessarily mean you'll be a poor scholar today.

To be blunt, it also depends on the school to which you apply.  Harvard probably won't take you, but there could be schools that might.  Pick a couple, visit them in person with a copy of your transcript, and ask.  You'll need an appointment for that personal visit; if you just show up, no telling who will talk to you.  You're visiting in person to show them you're serious.


What are the NCS journals? I have seen people mentioning special group of journal, namely NCS journals, but what does it stand for? When people say that "faculty has to publish in NCS to get a shot at tenure", what does it mean? Googling doesn't return anything useful.

The NCS stands for "Nature, Cell, Science", the top journals in STEM and biomedical fields. The impact factors of these journals are among highest, between 36 and 41.

Some have noticed that publication in NCS journal correlates with academic career success (getting tenure-track position at the top university), while others commented that degree of attention to these top journals is bad for science.


1 or 2 Year Master's Program I originally posted this on math.stackexchange but was recommended to post here.

I have been admitted to two Master's Programs in math (both with funding). One is 1 year long and the other is 2 years long. I plan on obtaining a PhD directly afterwards.

The 1 year option lets me save one year. But I would have to apply to PhD programs within the first semester and it seems I would not have time to get good recommendation letters or make a strong impression from my Master's Program. The 2 years option would give me more chance to demonstrate what I've done.

If they are comparable programs, which would be the better choice?

I would normally choose the two-year program, for exactly the reasons that you cite. One of the few reasons why I would consider the one-year program is if there is a particular individual you want to work with, or if it is your first-choice school for the PhD program and it offers a path of lower resistance to already be a student there.

Otherwise, as JeffE points out, you won't really save much time by going to the one-year program over the two-year program. (Besides, if it's a coursework-based program, you'll probably get more out of the two-year deal!)


Choosing research area I am considering pursuing a PhD in computer science one day.
I guess specializing in (is that the way to put it)?
What I want to focus my research efforts on.
I am interested in:

Manned/unmanned space exploration (writing guidance/navigation systems for the next Mars rover, etc).
Finding cures for diseases (folding @ home).
Computer models of climate change, as I am very much a person that thinks "Global Warming is real and needs to be dealt with yesterday".

But this questions isn't "what should I do research in" but more of "how can I decide what I should do research in."

I know a lot of people will counter with "if you don't know what you want to research then you shouldn't be considering getting a PhD", but I don't believe in that line of reasoning. I want to do research and to be involved with something that expands the boundaries of Computer Sciences as we know it.  Just because I am not exactly sure what avenue I should go down in doing so, doesn't in any way change how much I know that I do want to do it.

So where do I start with figuring out my specialization?
What are my theoretical options?
Where can I see if "getting my PhD to write software to guide probes to Jupiter" is even a viable option?
Must I choose a area that is currently being researched at the university I attend, or am I free to come up with my own?
Can/should I be reading recently released papers on Computer Science topics for some inspiration, and if so where do I go to find those?

This is one of the harder questions you'll have to ponder, and one of the most useful. First off, realize that your choices are not (completely) irrevocable. Many researchers shift areas every 5-7 years or so - the changes are not dramatic, but over time you can make useful contributions in a number of different areas.

Having said that, what you are looking for is a broad topic that will presumably take you through the 5-6 years of a Ph.D. To look at your questions one by one:

  Where can I see if "getting my PhD to write software to guide probes
  to Jupiter" is even a viable option?

Do you know of people working on this ? maybe at NASA ? Where did they do their Ph.D ? what kinds of topics do they publish in ? What I mean is that one way to figure out if "Ph.D in X" is viable is to see if there are people doing X, and then figure out what their trajectory was by looking at their publications, CV etc

  Must I choose a area that is currently being researched at the
  university I attend, or am I free to come up with my own?

It depends. You're in an MS program, and you haven't mentioned whether you're planning to apply elsewhere for a Ph.D. An MS is a good time to explore your options with people at the university, burnish your research credentials, and build some background in areas of interest. Obviously it helps if your area of interest is covered, but even if it's not, figure out related background that you need, and maybe look for someone doing research in a related area. Also see which places/people you'd like to do a Ph.D at based on the area, and that will give you a sense of what kind of extra reading/prep to do.

  Can/should I be reading recently released papers on Computer Science
  topics for some inspiration, and if so where do I go to find those?

But of course ! but you should try to focus your search a bit. There's a large body of work in each of the topics you listed, and google is your friend. Once you find even a few papers, you can figure out where they were published, and then look at other papers in those venues, and repeat.


Would graduate school be worth it for Computer Science? I am in my junior year of college and I am considering applying for my schools Jump program. This would allow me to have 12/30 hours done towards a Masters in CS, meaning I would need one year of graduate school. Would it be a wise investment to go to school for one extra year to have my Masters or should I just look for a job upon graduation? This program also guarantees a G.A. position, meaning I won't incur any extra debt. However, I do realize that this would mean that I would lose a years salary. I am not sure what to do, and how degrees affect careers in programming. I have also considered getting my PhD to teach CS at a college. If I go this route, would a masters help or should I directly apply to a PhD program? Sorry this is long winded, I am just very much in the dark when it comes to what is helpful for a career in CS. Thanks!

The answer will always be it depends.  You've done a pretty good job of listing out the negatives of the MS degree, principally another year not earning a salary, and not paying down student debt.

The biggest question you ask is

  would a masters help or should I directly apply to a PhD program?

The answer is likely yes.  You will get to work 1 on 1 with professors, and will have a better idea who you'd like to work with in the PhD program.  You can also use your time in the masters program to find funding for your PhD internally, further increasing the chances of your PhD application being accepted.  Finally, if you find you do not enjoy getting your masters degree, you should certainly not get a PhD.

Here are some other positives of having a masters degree.

1) Some private companies and almost all government/public jobs will give you a salary bump just for having it.

2) You can choose to specialize in an area you are interested in, which may lead to a job in that sub-field.

3) If you find yourself in a tough job market, it may give you and edge in the hiring process.


Math PhD in US vs Master + PhD in Europe I'm currently doing my bachelor's degree in mathematics in Germany (Heidelberg to be precise) and I'll soon be applying for master programs / grad school. I basically consider two  options:

I) First do a master's degree and then a PhD in Europe and try to get a postdoc position in the US afterwards

II) Go to grad school in the US now and then look for a postdoc position in the US

Concerning I) I really like how math programs at universities in Germany (and other European countries) are structured and if I decide to stay in Europe for now, I will probably do my master's degree at Bonn. However, I am afraid that I'll have a hard time finding a postdoc position in the US having done my PhD in Europe, both because my experience (for instance regarding teaching) might not be what US universities are looking for and because European universities might not have as good of a reputation as universities in the US. I suspect, at least a PhD from Oxford or Cambridge might have some prestige in the US, however, I really don't like the 9 month master system there, as I feel like the material is rushed through and as I've heard, in order to get admitted to a PhD there, it is strongly advised to also do your master's there.

Concerning II) Since I prefer the European master/PhD system, for me to be happy with moving to the US now, it would be helpful to get a position at a top university. I already (successfully) did the TOEFL test but I would have to do the GRE (both general and math) test. Together with application fees this would probably add up to about 1000$ which is a hell of lot of money.

So I guess my questions are:

1) Are my concerns regarding I) justified? How hard is it for someone who just completed their PhD in Europe to find a job at a university in the US?

2) What is the reputation of places like Heidelberg, Bonn, ETH Zürich,... in the US? Is a PhD from Oxbridge prestigious enough for it to be worth it to overcome my aversion towards their program?

3) Do I even stand a chance of getting admitted to a top US program? I took a lot of courses and managed to score between 1.0 and 1.3 (if I looked it up correctly, this should be between 3.7 and 4.0 GPA?) almost everywhere. However I haven't participated in any REUs and don't have anything to offer besides the courses I took. Having read what people that got admitted to Harvard, Princeton, Berkely... have done prior to grad school, I don't think I can keep up with them.

4) Having said that, do you think it is even worth applying and spending such a huge amount of money in the application process?

5) Do you have any other piece of advice or experience to share?

Thank you so much for your help!

I got my PhD in Germany (Heidelberg) and then did a postdoc in the US. I think that was the right choice: In the US, you will have to spend a couple of years taking classes, satisfying your breadth requirement, and you will likely have to teach alongside your research. There is much to be said about this system -- including that it teaches you to teach, and that you get a broader overview of what mathematics is -- but it all gets in your way of doing research. On the other hand, in the German system, you will most likely have relatively light teaching duties (if any) and have time to specialize. This will help you find a research area, and it will likely mean that you are better qualified than many American applicants once you apply for postdoc positions.

What is going to be important is that you form the personal connections on the other side of the pond to get a postdoc position there. Postdoc positions are not just awarded by accomplishments alone -- much as we would like that to be the case -- but also based on who you know, who your adviser knows, etc. This is so because when you apply for postdoc positions, your resume is still relatively thin: A couple of papers, a couple of conference presentations. In essence, every applicant on paper looks equally good, and so things like what university you come from, who your adviser was, and what the letters of recommendation say all have influence. The biggest influencer is if you know someone at the university you apply to. In other words, build these connections: go to conferences in the US if you can, contact people there to see whether they want to collaborate with you, see if your adviser knows people there and can support you for a 4-week stay. All of these things are going to matter.

Second, see that you can teach a course for a semester. Almost all US graduate students teach courses, and postdocs generally have to do the same. As a consequence, having taught (and having letters of recommendation that speak to your abilities as a teacher) is a criterion that is often considered when evaluating postdoc candidates. Try to make the selection committees job easier by providing them something in this area.

Finally, make yourself knowledgeable about the application deadlines in the US. These days, they are often at the end of October or November, for appointments that start in August or September of next year, at the beginning of the next academic year. (One can think that that is crazy, but that's how it is.) Most applicants will not yet have graduated at the time they apply, hoping to graduate at the end of the spring (May) or even summer semester (August). In other words, don't wait until you have your PhD to apply for a postdoc position -- you might have a gap of nearly a year if you do!


What does it mean when a paper is copyrighted by an organization? While I was searching for materials for my research topic, I found a research paper which is signed as copyright by "Some organization". Does that mean that I could not use the content of this paper nor the ideas it presents until the paper owner gives me permissions?

Not necessarily. Copyright prohibits you from presenting the work as yours under any circumstances. In addition, it prohibits you from publishing or recopying large segments of the work, without securing the permission of the owner of the copyright.

However, the existence of copyright does not exclude you from citing the work of others, nor mentioning what their key ideas are. Such use of copyright is covered by fair-use guidelines. Under these circumstances, though, you are still responsible for following the proper citation procedures of your university or the journal to which you are submitting the work under question. Note, however, that this is a tricky balance, and you should be careful to directly quote only the material you absolutely need to duplicate, as fair use is not an absolute guideline.


Is taking a sentence in English language and reformulate in french, a plagiarism I am writing my PHD thesis in french, sometimes I took some sentences, phrases from english references and try to rewriting them in french so that the meaning is close.

Is this a plagiarism?

Yes, basically taking someone's language, thoughts, ideas or expressions without correct referencing is plagiarism...

Edit based on comments:

If you reference the material correctly, even though you translated and / or paraphrased it, is fine.


Can I write a thesis without any help from others? If I can, how? I cannot get any help from my supervisor if I want to write a new thesis. Not only that, I didn't have anyone in my lab. Therefore it's obvious that I don't have any people who can help me here. I'm trying to write it again by myself.

Is it that impossible? If that is the case, what can I do for it? Or should I just give it up?

Thanks.

A degree is awarded by a university. So you can't get a degree while completely ignoring the university. The problem for us is that the exact rules differ substantially between countries and universities within countries. So we cannot give you any concrete advice.

However, there are typically student advisors at a university whose job is to help you. These are typically people who help students with all the formalities, help with study specific choices, help students who want to go a semester abroad, for bigger problems help the student find the appropriate person in the university, etc. So that would be the first step for you to take. Find that student advisor, and talk to her or him. (S)he will probably tell you that you need to enroll again, and the steps you need to take to find a thesis advisor and write the thesis.

You seem to have had a bad experience at that university, so maybe you want to consider another university. Again talk to the student advisor at that new university and see if they can recognize (some of) the courses you finished from your original university.


Applying for another PhD after dropping out 4 years ago, should I use my previous PhD supervisor or undergraduate supervisor for a reference? I dropped out of my previous PhD 4 years ago, because my UK institution had a four year maximum time limit for completion which I didn't meet due to my mental health issues. I'm now recovered and have been working for the last three years in a research position at another university. I would now like to apply to do my PhD part-time in the department where I work.

I think my previous supervisor would give me a reasonable reference as he was sympathetic to my issues, but I am concerned about how it would look to use an academic reference from a qualification I didn't complete. My only alternative would be a generic reference from my undergraduate study director who will not even remember me as I only met him a handful of times and I completed that degree ten years ago.

Which would look best?

Assuming your resume includes the fact that you spent 4 years doing PhD research and were not awarded the degree, I don't see the problem with asking your former supervisor for a reference. I assume this is the case, because you still need to account for the 4 years in your work history. In that case, your supervisor's letter could be valuable in explaining that you weren't told to leave the program due to other concerning issues; this was for health reasons.

But here's the key: can your former supervisor write a strong letter of recommendation? Ask him or her explicitly whether they can do that. If not, move on to a different reference.

Think about any other references you might be able to call upon in your current position as an alternative. Do they need to be professors? Have you worked with research associates or other professionals who can vouch for you?


MS in Computer Science with low GPA I want to get into MS in Computer science in the US, specifically in data science. I have a Masters in Physics but my GPA is low. I have scored 51% in my undergrad and 62% in my postgrad. I have cleared my postgrad with 10+ back logs. But I have an international conference paper published in radio astronomy. I have also worked as an intern in web team of leading daily as a science writer. I also have 2+ experience in teaching Physics. I have also volunteered in outreach activities by TIFR, Mumbai. In my undergrad, I have also won prizes in working models related to science. I have an 8.0 score in IELTS and gearing up for my GRE.
what are my chances to get into a decent college?

To make my application better, I have enrolled myself into John Hopkins Data Science program by Coursera and I am also learning Python. Will it help?

The reason I had for backlogs is financial troubles in my family. I was doing odd part-time jobs which caused so many backlogs.

Without more information from the OP, this answer will be a bit tentative. I'm not sure that a low GPA is your biggest issue, though some schools have rules that they enforce quite rigidly.

I think the biggest obstacle for you now, that you can correct somewhat at least with time and effort, is that your academic background seems to be haphazard rather than focused. Normally a master's is quite focused and depends on the student having certain skills, usually from their undergraduate years. You don't seem to obviously have that.

Learning Python, of itself, will help you very little, actually as it is just a tool. But you may be missing most of the content of the undergraduate education, including, perhaps the vital Algorithms and Data Structures courses, as well as Database and a few others.

Physics (at most levels) is an actual science. That seems to be your background. Computer Science isn't a science at all (in most areas) and hasn't been for half a century. Data science is a bit between, however, as it can be experimental, not just constructive. In CS, we mostly build things, rather than search for the truths provided by the cosmos.

It might be, that if you want to study big data in Physics specifically, that you might find a program somewhere that focuses on that, though it would likely be in a Physics department. If you can find that, your background might be seen as helpful.

But in general, if you want a MS (MSc) degree you should spend some time (not a small amount of time) focusing your studies in one area primarily that will help you be seen as having the needed skills.

While broad interests in life are valued and valuable, academia mostly values specialization. Studying data science online may help you provided you do enough of it and do it well enough, but your broad background may only make it harder. If you can find a way to get some of the background in an actual educational institution (with a mentor) it would (for most people) be better than online courses, which are harder to judge no matter how good they are. There is too much variability in student outcomes to trust them completely. Focus.


Earnings generated by open-access papers vs. paywalled papers Is there any research/study/survey that tried to compare the  earnings generated by open-access papers (researchers/institutions pay when publishing) vs. paywalled papers (researchers/institutions pay when reading)? I.e., for a given paper, do publishers make more money through the open-access model, or through the paywall model?

This question came from Mark's comment (mirror).

FYI: Are open access papers read by a larger readership than paywalled papers?

For subscription earnings, the most prevalent figure is in the ballpark of $5,000/ per paper. It is obtained by dividing the total revenue of the STM journal subscription market by the number of published paper in the same year. Some sources: this blog post and link therein provide estimate based on precise sources; this STM report (2015) mentions an estimate of £3095 per paper, with a rough decomposition of the cost.

Remember this is an average, I know a publishing house who would typically have prices of the order of $50 per page (in math, so about $1000 per paper) - but hey, they do a much better job than Springer or Elsevier, so of course they are 5 time cheaper. Heu, wait...

For Open Access article, things are way more complicated. First, it is not true that OA means that "researchers/institutions pay when publishing": Green OA is quite independent of journals (authors deposit their postprints in a repository) and many Gold OA journals, including high-standing ones, run on voluntary work or subsidies or both and do not ask for APC (Article Processing Charges, aka publishing fees). Here, it is my duty to introduce Fair Open Access.

Second, there is the case of hybrid journals (some papers are OA, the others are closed to non-subscribers). Figures have to the best of my knowledge not be compiled and publicly available.

Third, even for those Gold OA journal relying on APC, I do not know of a good source to get an average price; I have seen prices from $500 to $5,000, possibly more. But it is true that currently Gold OA seems quite lower priced than subscription on average. However Nature have said that if they where to turn OA, they would "have to" charge several tens of thousands of dollar per article. So one can guess that OA may have developed first in the lower-cost segment of the market, rather than being intrinsically lower-priced.


Should paper reviews be signed? Occasionally, in an otherwise-anonymous paper review, the reviewer will voluntarily sign their name, revealing their identity to the author.

Should reviewers do this, and under which circumstances?

(For the purposes of this question, assume that the reviewer knows the author's name - that is, the review process is not double-blinded.)

I do not think the "should" word is appropriate here. Each reviewer decides whether he/she wants to sign it or not. Most reviews today are anonymous. I think it is considered sort of default by the journals today. One might tend to think that a signed review will more fair. But a decent person will do a fair review regardless of whether he/she signs it or not. When a review is signed, this could result in some unexpected complications: suppose a reviewer did not understood one of your analyses. So, once the review is signed, the author might write directly to the reviewer, without involving the editor. This might violate the review process. I also do not think that most of the reviewers are interested in such sort of communication.


How to protect the copyright of the thesis draft? I just finished the draft of my thesis and want someone else to do a proofreading on it because I am not a native speaker of English. I wonder if any things I shall do to protect the copyright of the draft before I pass it to others?

If you live in the US or any other country that observes the rules of the Berne Convention, your work is automatically protected by copyright as soon as it is saved to a fixed medium (which may be your hard drive, a printout, or scribbles in a notebook).

So if your work is written down, it's already protected with respect to copyright.

There may be other things about the draft that you wish to protect - for example, you may wish to ask the proofreader not to speak about your ideas with anyone else - but that is not a copyright issue.


Should I include the country when citing government agencies in APA? I use APA citation style. When I cite a government agency as the author or publisher of a work, should I include "United States", "U.S.", or omit the country entirely? Is it ever appropriate to include a country in brackets or parentheses when it isn't part of the agency name?

Some agencies have United States as part of their formal name, even if they don't often use it, eg. United States Drug Enforcement Administration. Other agencies don't have "United States" as part of their formal name, eg. the Federal Bureau of Investigation. If there is potential for confusion with the agency of another country with a similar name, can I put the country name in parentheses or brackets, eg "Federal Bureau of Investigations [U.S.]. (2019). ..."?

I'm in the United States in a context where documents from the executive agencies of other countries are unlikely to be cited, so I tend to omit the country. However, if I do cite, say the Department of Education of South Africa, do I need to add U.S. to my references to disambiguate them? This is not a minor change, as it effects alphabetization.

What I found online:

The Pen and the Pad uses examples which omit U.S.

Washington & Lee University library guide uses this example:

United States. Department of Justice.  Office of
     Justice Programs. National Institute of Justice.
     (1998). High school youths, weapons, and violence:
     A national survey by J.F. Sheley and J.D. Wright.
     Washington DC: National Institute of Justice.
     (Research in brief)   (J 28.24:Y 8)

All those periods in an author sure seems clumsy to me. I probably would have done "National Institute of Justice [U.S.]. (1998)." or "United States Department of Justice. (1998)."

My preference would be to just use "U.S." inline versus omission, spelling it out, or using parentheses.  Think this is adequate to give the information but is tight and doesn't look awkward.

I would use this both in text (for example funding acknowledgements) or citations.  Also spell out agencies.  Not CIA or BUPERS but whole name. Note, it is fine in normal conversation, emails, etc. to use the acronyms if context and audience make it clear [for example in a question here about U.S. specific funding agencies I could say "NSF" in an answer].  But not in peer reviewed literature heading out to the world.

P.s.  There is some fussiness about U.S. versus US.  I would stick with U.S. as the more traditional and common spelling. (But let copy editors do what they want--this is minutia.)  US is preferred in the context of the military and in some newer style guides.  U.S. is still more traditional in grammar texts, newspaper style guides, and civilian parts of U.S. government.


What are all the types of scientific articles? While doing some research I found some context where scientist A publishes a research article about newly generated progress they made in a field. Another researcher B, skeptical of this paper, publishes a "Review paper", and analyses what A has written. To which then A responds by writing an article titled as "Research commentary" to retort on the latter.

Throughout this development is where I had the question hit me, how many kinds of scientific articles are there? I am personally still on my first year of PhD research, so I have not yet published a paper or had to confront a journal, but I was still surprised to not see an exhaustive answer to this question here or anywhere else, to which I believe would be really beneficial to sorting and understanding articles and giving more context to state of the art research in any specific field.

There is probably no exhaustive taxonomy. The options depend on the database. Databases of scientific publications usually contain the variable 'document type' (or so) in their metadata, and have a wide range of options for operationalising that type.
For example, Web of Science lists their document types here. They include, inter alia, 'Article', 'Biographical Item', 'Correction', 'Database Review', 'Excerpt', 'Hardware Review', 'Music Score', 'Reprint', and 'Retraction'.
Scopus has a smaller list; you can see its document types in this PDF on pp. 11-12.
ORCID likewise allows you to choose from many options regarding the 'work types'; see the list here. They include, to name some examples, 'book-chapter', 'dictionary-entry', 'dissertation', 'encyclopedia-entry', 'edited-book', 'journal-issue', 'manual', 'newsletter-article', 'supervised-student-pulication', 'translation' and 'working-papers'.


Thesis: does the first page of Chapter 1 need to be in odd page? After reading some PhD theses, I realize that the first pages of Chapter 1 are always in odd pages. I wonder if this is just a coincident or it is an unwritten rule? Thanks.

This isn't just PhD theses: many books are formatted so that all chapters start on a right-hand page. Conventionally, all right-hand pages have odd numbers, and left-hand pages have even numbers. However, theses are often formatted single-sided, for the convenience of examiners, and so there would be no right/left distinction in that instance.

Another possibility is that page numbering sometimes uses Roman numerals for the "front matter" (all pages before the start of the first chapter), and then begins again with Arabic numerals for the "main matter". In this case, the first chapter will start with page 1, which is an odd number.

Your observation will not be the case for all theses, but it may hold when the institution's rules, or the software tools being used, follow these standard formatting principles.


How to clearly lay out research ideas A constant struggle for most graduate students is how to clearly lay out research ideas in a coherent manner. We are constantly in the "weeds" reading papers, move data around, running models, and researching tiny little details. When we decide to come up for air and begin to talk about our ideas they are unorganized and unclear. We assume people know what we are talking about and so we talk right past them.

So my question is, how do you clearly and coherently lay out research ideas?

Are there books to help with this, or other resources? Are there ways to overcome this challenge as a researcher?

Big ideas

Think about breaking your big ideas down into manuscript ideas--what would be the focus of each paper you could potentially write? This helps to break big-picture research topics down into both manageable and focused sub-topics, and will help you plan the even smaller research steps needed to achieve the bigger goals.

So for example, if my big grand research question is "Why are all my houseplants dying and how do I save them?" I could foresee breaking that into manuscripts:

Review of common houseplants with compiled statistics on hardiness, common stresses, etc. and development of new quantitative metric for normalized houseplant stress level
Experimental results of houseplant responses to induced stresses
Application of a new methodology for protecting houseplants from common stresses.

Similarly, break your smaller sub-projects down by what results you'd like to attain (e.g., figure comparing x and y as a function of z, calibrated equation describing x(z), etc.), then plan your work around reaching these goals.
Keep your notebooks organized according to these big ideas (e.g., Plants Notebook).
The front page of each of my notebooks is a running to-do list of things that are relevant right now, which I try to review and update at least once a week.

Smaller ideas

Make sure your smaller ideas fit in under your larger research goals/plans above, and record your ideas in the appropriate subject notebooks
Keep a "parking lot" notebook for your random thoughts and ideas that might not be tractable/relevant right now but might someday be useful.

General

I like to use a digital notebook app instead of a paper notebook to keep things organized since you can move text around as needed... my old paper notebooks are full of notes on different topics all mixed randomly so it's hard to find them again, and relevant notes are often in very different places. You can keep different notebooks for different topics, but I've found it's still hard to keep things organized and the topics themselves often evolve over time.
Go back occasionally and re-read/reorganize/rewrite your old notes. This is especially facilitated by using digital notebooks because it allows your notes to be more of an actively updated list of relevant things you're working on right now (for the most part), rather than a bunch of disjointed things you randomly wrote down way back.
In addition to (digital) notebooks for each subject I'm researching, I also keep notebooks for seminars/conferences/meetings/workshops (since they're often on random topics unrelated to my research), administrative/proposals, outreach, teaching, classes, and papers (notes on papers I've read). Any info in one of these that's also relevant to a research project, I'll copy over to that subject notebook (this is a little clunky and would be easier if I could find a notes app that lets you cross-reference or alias pages to multiple notebooks...).


Quitting current PhD programme and impact on future PhD applications. I am currently enrolled in a PhD programme in a north American university and I am considering quitting my current PhD and applying for a PhD in another institution.

The reasons for me doing this are:

My advisor (Who is excellent in his research area) has very little knowledge in my research topic and avoids technical discussions with me in the group meeting because of this.
Assigned me multiple time-consuming projects. One of the projects is just performing measurements for a company from which he is getting funding. The measurements are time-consuming and the results are not publishable and will not be part of my thesis. Our group is heavily understaffed.
When I mentioned that this project is not a research project and is more of a job and does not interest me, my advisor used my stipend as a leverage to make me continue working on it and that the project brings funds to the group. This was not in my "Research" PhD admission offer. This makes me feel like a cheap labour rather than a researcher which I do not accept.
Asked me to write journal and conference papers with a very little contribution. For my advisor, quantity matters more than quality.
My advisor is not open minded to any ideas I come up with. Forces me to work in a direction that I think will lead to project failure. It takes me months to convince him that the ideas are not valid and do not achieve what is required, and when I make my point clear eventually he still wants me to work on that because he promised funding agencies to pursue that direction. This resulted in more than one heated discussion with my advisor. I also found that some claims in the previous publications of the group related to my research are not correct.
I mentioned that I am interested in working on a certain topic and he used me interest as a leverage, that I need to "make him happy" in order to allow me to work on that topic and that I have to finish other projects.
Poses unrealistic deadlines for which I worked extremely hard to achieve very little and with little return. He thinks by doing this he is making me work harder, however, this led to lower work quality which annoys me.

My question: Are these reasons reasonable for quitting the PhD and starting somewhere else? Will the fact that I left a PhD programme and applied somewhere else in a better alignment with my interest negatively impact my appication? I am motivated and I want do good research and a PhD.

Note: Changing advisor is not really an option. I am not able to think of an advisor with whom my interests align.

My thoughts on this:

Stay or Go: You said the following, so just by that, it is a big red flag and it is time to move on.

  My advisor (Who is excellent in his research area) has very little
  knowledge in my research topic and avoids technical discussions with
  me in the group meeting because of this.

Future Applications: Actually I saw many cases like this who doesn't move on quick enough and stay in an unhealthy situation. So it is good that you figure out the situation and want to change that. As long as you can present yourself in an interview with the new supervisor and explain your situation, you should be fine.

Main Drawback: Obviously the time is a huge issue here. Can you financially take a hit and spend 6 months to a year to find another position?

Alternatives: You can either find another supervisor from the same university or even research group, or you can find a supervisor from your old university were you did graduate for your Bsc/Msc.


How and when should I identify my specific research interests? I am a Computer Science graduate, who is passionate about Computer Science and various topics and want to explore them in and out.

I am interested in research but I cannot refine my interests to a particular topic. It is possibly because I did not get a chance to play with various stuffs and do various projects. So how should I refine my interests to a particular topic?Is it too early to think about it,that is should I wait for getting a Masters or am I right to think about it currently?

You are an undergrad now, so that means you have neither experience nor plenty of free time. But this doesn't mean you can't give it a shot: read up about research, and find interesting projects to do. Aim for something small, that you can, for example, accomplish in one year. The next year, try something different. I'd probably focus on topics that are not exactly covered in your curriculum, as those you are going to learn anyway.

I studied Physics, but on the side I experimented with computer simulations, to later go to image and video processing, analysis of experimental spectra, and complex networks (graph theory). All this taught me tools and ideas that I am now using, in a completely different field (Bioinformatics).

The truth is, before I started looking for a PhD, I didn't even considered Bioinformatics as an option, but I saw one offer, looked appealing, and decided it was exactly what I wanted to do. How is everything I did helping me? For example:

I have to compare some pieces of data. Comparing them pairwise is simple, so I remembered networks, and designed a robust way of combining the comparison into a global measurement. As a plus, I knew already of a good library, and how to use it so I could start coding my ideas right away.
Now I have a matrix, and I have to dig out some patterns (with lots of gaps). From my time doing image processing I remember reading about the Hough transform, and it turns out it looks a promising start point. But I also remembered when I was analysing spectra that the output is quite complex, so I will keep in mind the caveats.

The bottom line is that you don't have to start now in what you want to do. In fact, you will be a more efficient researcher if you know many different things, as you never know where you are going to end up. All this, of course, keeping an eye on your official studies.


What are the major differences between PhD programs in mathematics and PhD programs in other STEM fields? I am currently two years into a math PhD program at a mid-tier state school. I read a lot of advice about getting a STEM PhD on the Internet, but a lot of it seems very inapplicable to mathematics.  I don't have a lab or a PI, I don't need data, and my assistantship consists solely of teaching.  None of the advice I read sounds anything like the experience I'm having here.

Compared to other STEM fields,

How common is it for math students to be supported by external funding (e.g. NSF GRFP) rather than a TAship? How common is it for math students to do internships in industry to gain practical experience?  How common is it for math students to do outreach or volunteer work during graduate school?
Does a math department generally provide support and guidance to students when it comes to finding and applying for fellowships and internships?  Is it a common attitude that it is the student's responsibility, if he wants those things, to undertake all steps of this process by himself?
Is it normal for math departments to disregard students' research interests in favor of mandatory coursework?  For example, because all of my time is tied up in the 1st/2nd year courses and exams, I have been unable to do any research for the last two years, despite being very prepared and capable on my first day. (I published during undergrad and was chasing several promising ideas when I arrived.) When I asked to be allowed time to do research instead of taking classes, I was rudely shut down.
How often do mathematics departments get together in social or community events, such as departmental happy hours?
How is networking different in mathematics?  Do professors generally have connections in industry or prominent members of their field, or is that a rare thing?

(Note. I'm sure it is evident from some of the above questions that I am feeling a little put off by my department. The point of this question is not to seek out sympathy or validation.  The department just seems stubbornly uncooperative, and completely uninvested in my future, which is not what I was expecting. I want to know how common this is- whether it is unique to my department, or the nature of the discipline.  But this is a peripheral point, the question I'm asking is about how these factors work in general, not just with me.)

In brief, many aspects of math grad school are very different from CompSci, for example.

The vast majority of math grad students are funded by TA-ships, although some have NSF and other fellowships. The (large) size of typical math depts is tied to their role as service departments, teaching lower-division math, and this is what funds the large number of math grad students.

Internships in some applied math fields are desirable, but non-trivial to arrange.

Outreach and volunteer work are not strongly connected with these other questions.

It is not that math depts "disregard students' research interests", but that, almost universally in the U.S., further coursework beyond undergrad work is ... wise. If one has an unusually solid background, there are usually procedures by which to "test out" of requirements. On another hand, I am well aware that a certain number of grad students do feel that they're all ready to do research, and that coursework gets in the way. The "problem" is that "research" at a professional level in mathematics is not necessarily an immediate continuation of the sort of "research" typically done in undergrad projects. Another "problem" is that mathematics is an old subject, and there is a lot of very useful, helpful, enlightening stuff already known... and whose relevance to any given research project is very difficult to guess based on ignorance. I am absolutely not in favor of "oppressing" students by pointless busywork, but I am equally opposed to ignorance. Accurate perception of a given situation is difficult, and both students and faculty often have pre-existing biases... Again, testing-out of requirements ought to be a viable option, if one is well-prepared. If one doesn't see the relevance of the requirements, I'd tend to interpret this as reflecting a need to better understand the content of the required subjects. (Because they are relevant.)

In particular, depts to not "disregard students' research interests", except as not automatically exempting students from "requirements". Further, there are many hours in a day...

As to social events... it depends.

Networking? People know people. "Industrial connections" would exist only for very applied people, although connections to applied science research groups inside the university are common.

And/but none of what the question describes strikes me as unusually "uncooperative". In my observation, it is very common that math grad school is quite different from what people are expecting, exactly insofar as many students expect to immediately "start research" (perhaps parallel to the impression given about other STEM fields' programs), rather than having any required coursework at all. Also, there seems to be a not-uncommon disaffection with TA-ing, as though this were lowlier than having a fellowship of some sort or research assistantship... and is construed, again, as "obstructing research". But without all these TA-ships, many fewer math grad students would have any financial support at all. (There's little grunt-work available in mathematics that would compare to the low-level research-support work in some other STEM fields, which does (by tradition) get the student's name on a published paper, etc.)

So, yes, mathematics is somewhat different from other STEM fields. Further, the fact that a program is not what one presumed it would/should be is not at all a strong indicator that something's wrong with the program (although, of course, there are dubious programs). The greatest resentment I see is among students who believe that they're fully-fledged "researchers", and are offended to not be immediately treated as such... While this message can be imparted rudely, and perceived as "a rude shut-down", the many issues of professional competence are not easy for novices to judge.

(One more time: one can see about "testing out" of requirements...)

Edit: prompted by Brian Borcher's comment... Teaching is an important part of an academic mathematician's job! The question of "how much" is secondary. The TA experience is very important to get up to speed on teaching, and, in unhappy cases, to discover early on that one hasn't the taste for it, if that is so. (I had one PhD student who discovered this unhappy fact in his own case, so he did not take the academic route.) Part of what one should try to learn is that "teaching is not a burden"... !!! ... to say the least. :)


How can I make myself eligible for Mechatronic Engg. faculty with PhD in Electrical engg,? My major in PhD is Telecommunication and there is one position for Mechatronic Engineer. How can I make myself eligible for the post. Since I am electronic engineering graduate with masters in Aerospace engineering, I have sufficient skills to take Mechatronic engineering as a faculty.

However, my last degree (PhD) is in Telecommunication. Any suggestions about what should I put in my application which can weigh in as something special?

You're applying for a job. Treat it like any other job application. Write a cover letter introducing yourself, explaining where you heard about your job, and how you meet the posted job criteria, and attach it to a copy of your CV, which should include all relevant details of your previous work and study experience (and, depending on region, might also be expected to include a comprehensive list of all previous employment and study).


Whom to suggest as an editor when submitting a paper? Some journals let authors to suggest who should handle their submission. How should one choose the suggested editors? In my particular case, I struggled with selection because

One of the possible choices was an editor who was one of my co-author's opponent when his dissertation was publicly examined
One editor was affiliated with the same institution as one of my co-authors
One editor had published with one of my co-authors
Two editors were well known by my co-authors (no shared projects)
Two editors I had never heard about

Our paper had about 10 authors from 6 different institutions. I selected an unknown editor because I felt there was some kind of potential conflict of interest (even if just perceived) in selecting someone else. However, I have been wondering whether I did the correct choice? My paper got eventually rejected but I got some nice feedback to improve the work. Therefore, I might face the same situation soon again, when I get to the point of resubmitting the paper to some other journal.

You are correct, selecting an editor the authors have not met avoids perceived conflict of interest, which is a good thing.  I think "editors were well known by my co-authors (no shared projects)" is also a good choice.

It's not always possible to eliminate all potential conflicts of interest.  I would prioritize avoiding selecting an editor whom I had coauthored a paper with, since that is a very important form of professional relationship.  Ultimately, assigning the manuscript to an appropriate editor should be the journal editor-in-chief's responsibility, not the author's.


Stackoverflow reputation - worth mentioning in personal statement? It is going to be my last year in school, and I am thinking about studies abroad - I would love to study computer science. Lately, I started participating more in Stackoverflow, answering to PHP, MySQL, and HTML questions. If I manage to answer to a decent amount of questions(now I have 26, I am thinking about ~75-100) would it be worth mentioning in my personal statement (not the number, but that I am participating in the community, providing university with my nickname used here). I have other experiences that I am planning to write there:

I have taught people online of how to use microcomputers
I have taught people of HTML basics
I am writing my extended essay on computer science (I am attending IB diploma program)
I am currently working on quite a big project for my school using not spaghetti code, but a normal MVC architecture and OOP (at least, I am trying)

Is participating in Stackoverflow community worth mentioning among these (or maybe it is even stronger than what I mentioned?), or not?

If you find value in participating in an activity, then you should feel free to put it in your personal statement. It's no better or worse, say, than including your participation in hosting a neighbourhood PHP class, just that your "neighbourhood" is on the web. Just note the following:

Assessors may not understand what Stackoverflow is, so you may need to spend valuable space informing them about it. You need to describe not only what you do, but why you do it.
You may have many other activities in which you find value that you would like to feature. This means that the space you use to describe Stackoverflow will compete with space that you could use to describe other things. At its heart, isn't this an economic decision?
Understand that some assessors may look you up on Stackoverflow and assess your work differently. These sites are public, after all. Are you prepared for this to happen?

Good luck!


What is an optimal reading order for a set of related papers? A common problem I encounter every time I do a literature search on a new subject is determining a reading order for papers.  It feels akin to jumping into a prolific sci-fi fantasy series, but since there usually don't exist enthusiastic fan bases for a random subset of papers on numerical methods for PDEs, I'm always struggling to figure out how to get started.  My default is chronological order (oldest to newest), but this frequently poses problems if the oldest paper is using outdated notation or technology.  A newest to oldest reading order has the problem that it might assume background information from previous papers, which leaves me feeling like I have to keep jumping around texts and never really get a coherent picture of any of them.

Does anyone have better ideas for determining an "optimal" reading order for related academic papers?  Perhaps a simple metric for ranking importance (but not citation counts, since this would skew towards older papers).

Note that when I say ``read a paper," I'm already employing a multi-stage technique where I read the abstract, conclusion, and introduction, then skim the text, and afterwards decide whether it's worth downloading and reading in detail. So the set of papers I have now, I've determined are worth really reading in detail.

I often struggle with the same question.  One approach which I find often gives good results is to start by skimming through all the papers (typically in chronological order) and use this first reading to decide on a more appropriate reading order, typically starting with the ones which seem more introductory or survey-like and ending with the more detailed ones.


What should be included when inquiring about the status of my application? I am currently applying for research and faculty positions. After an initial phone interview, how can I politely ask for feedback on the status of my application?
What are the necessary, optional, and unwise topics of such a letter?
As a concrete example, here is a quick draft:

I am writing to follow up on our discussion a few weeks ago about the position in (My Field) at (Your Institution).  I remain very interested in the position and would appreciate the opportunity to work with you and the (XYZ) group.
In particular, have you been able to narrow the list of candidates, and am I included? Is there any additional information that I could provide to support my application?
I also appreciate that you sent me a copy of your unpublished manuscript. It promises to make an important contribution to the field by providing the type of robust approach to (The Method) that is required. I would like to learn more - would you be willing to share the supplementary information with me as well?

As someone who has been participating in more of these hiring discussions recently, and been responsible for filling some of them myself, I would encourage you to use extreme caution before sending out such emails.

Faculty search committees usually consist of faculty members who are already quite overworked, and who have to deal with potentially many candidates who may all want to pester them with questions. If somebody starts acting like a nuisance, they might consider that person "not a team player" and reject the application on those grounds alone.

However, there are a few times when it is appropriate to ask about such deadlines:

When you have received an offer from another institution, but the institution you're writing to is a higher-perference choice. Then you are doing two things: you're making sure that you get an informed decision, plus you're also letting the other guys know that if they're interested in you, they'll need to make a move quickly.
If you have a major update to announce. This might include a change in location (new position, new mailing address, etc.) as well as status updates—you've earned a promotion or a major award. Then it would be OK to mention this in an email.
It is well past the "standard" deadline, or a promised deadline. Then you're just following up on an arrangement, and it's hard to argue against this.

However, you should never ask if you are included on the list of finalists. That's considered both rude, as well as unfair to everybody else involved. Like eykanal, I think the last paragraph in your excerpt is always superfluous, and should not be included in an email requesting a status update. (You could and perhaps should send it as part of a thank-you note to the interviewer.)


Choosing reference letters I'm applying from Europe to US or US-styled Ph.D. programs and I'm wondering about who to choose for referees.

I graduated 2 years ago and my undergraduate professors don't remember me well, or at least I don't think so. In those two years I have worked as a research assistant in one lab, with three different post-docs. Should I diversify the source of my references and try to get references from my undergraduate institution or should I just opt for the people that I've been working with?

I think the latter group knows me better and has, generally, a better opinion of me and my work. Then again, I'm afraid that the single source of references will be suspicious.

I mentioned having studied in Europe because the undergraduate research options are typically limited, compared to American institutions where research experience is strongly encouraged. I only did a research thesis during my undergrad.

Having sat (as a graduate student) on my department's admissions committee for two years, I can provide a few thoughts from my own personal experience.

First off, everyone has "good" references - it's very rare that a reference writer will say something negative or even something neutral. What sets apart the really good ones is that the writer can provide a specific, concrete anecdote that demonstrates an applicants skill set, attitude, previous successes, etc. So in that regard, knowing you the best probably trumps almost everything.

That said, having three letters from postdocs (none from professors), all of whom are in the same lab, is likely to make your letters somewhat redundant. If you worked with each of them on very different projects, or you know that they have very different things to say about you (in particular if they can speak to different aspects of your work or personality), this might make sense - but to have all three from the same place might be a bit much.

Not knowing anything else about your situation, it would seem that perhaps two letters from your current lab and one from a professor at your undergrad institution would be a reasonable balance.


How can I get the opportunity to talk during my meetings with professors? I am a PhD student and often I will meet with my advisor and our collaborators.  But they always do all the talking even though I am the only one writing code.  And sometimes I will try to ask a question or make a suggestion and then half the time they will just talk over me.

I am wondering if this is because I am a woman, or because I am the only PhD student in the meeting, or if I am just not talking loud enough or something.  I am also wondering if this would keep happening to me if I quit my PhD and worked at a male dominated software company, or if it is more specific to academia, and made worse by the fact that everyone I interact with is much more senior than me.

I have another project where both my collaborators are women and this never happens when I work with them.

Why not write an email to your advisor with your concerns?

Women are not the only ones with this problem.  Those fast-talkers maybe don't even realize they are leaving you out.

Here is a good book.
Quiet: The Power of Introverts in a World That Can't Stop Talking,
by Susan Cain
It may help you understand your situation.  But it's those other guys who need to read it, and probably won't.

When you get to a software company, it may get better.  At least if it is large enough to have managers who are not merely former programmers who were promoted.  One can hope that those with management training know about these things: The one with the loudest voice may not be the one with the best idea.  And there are management practices that can make the best of all workers, whether they are fast-talkers or timid wall-flowers.


How do academics find time to write books? Books covering primarily academic topics, from philosophy and neuroscience to physics and geopolitics, are usually written (not surprisingly) by experts in the field, which are normally academics themselves. I wonder how these academics secure the time and funding to write such books?

To give a few arbitrary examples, I refer to books like these (note that these are not college textbooks):

Nihil Unbound: Enlightenment and Extinction - at the time of publication, the author was an associate professor of philosophy;
Phi: A Voyage from the Brain to the Soul - the author is a professor of psychiatry at the University of Wisconsin;
Incomplete Nature: How Mind Emerged from Matter - the author is a professor of biological anthropology;
The Global Minotaur: America, Europe and the Future of the Global Economy - the author is a professor of economics.

Is this something academics normally work on in their spare time, or do they get paid to actually do it? Are there grants or donations involved? Is it a privilege that comes with tenure? I'm mostly familiar with life science research, where people will constantly publish papers in journals and that's it - there seems to be no time nor funding to write anything beyond that, at least not as a part of the job.

Apparently, the amount of books written by academics also varies with discipline - e.g. there are more books by professors of philosophy compared to professors of physics. Is this also due to the differences in funding mechanisms and day-to-day job duties among various disciplines?

What are the main factors that influence this?

I'm an associate professor in a humanistic social science (anthropology). Anthropology is different from pure humanities in that monographs are usually based on extended participant-observation fieldwork.

Before getting tenure, I wrote two books (monographs):

The first book was an extension of my original PhD dissertation. I revised and submitted it to academic presses in the first three years of my first tenure-track job. I used a portion of my third year leave to do the final editing of the ms.
I used the remaining half of my third-year leave to do some of the research for my second book. I also changed universities and used another year of leave provided by them for additional fieldwork. The second book was then written during summers and other leave periods.

So in the twelve years  or so years since my doctorate, I've finished two books. I'm currently working on my third using a portion of my triennial leave to focus on writing it. Each book has taken around 4-6 years to research and write -- which is on the fast side compared to some of my peers. I should note that one of my senior colleagues in history has written a book every two years -- he is considered exceptional by most.

To answer some of your specific questions:

  Is this something academics normally work on in their spare time, or do they get paid to actually do it?

Writing books (for faculty in the humanities / humanistic social sciences) is considered part of our research output -- the same as when natural scientists write journal articles. We try to do secondary research and write during the school year and do our primary field research in the summers and when we can get research leaves (sabbaticals, triennials, etc.).

  Are there grants or donations involved?

I used external grants to conduct the field research for the books. I also used internal grants for book completion (copyright clearances, indexing, production offsets, etc.).

It should be noted that the royalties for most academic books (except popular textbooks) are very modest.  At best, you might earn a few thousand (US) dollars on royalties on an academic book. Many don't make any money at all. Advances on books are also very rare.

  Is it a privilege that comes with tenure?

No. If you want tenure, you have to write. At most R1s, you have to have at least one monograph for a strong tenure bid (in humanities/humanistic social sciences).

  I'm mostly familiar with life science research, where people will constantly publish papers in journals and that's it - there seems to be no time nor funding to write anything beyond that, at least not as a part of the job.

In disciplines where monographs are important, journal articles are slightly deprecated in importance.

Note that monographs are also separate from edited volumes. In disciplines where "books" are prioritized, this almost always means a single-authored monograph from an academic press. Edited volumes count much less in value in terms of promotion and merit raises.


Impact of PhD cgpa in academia and industry I'm a Physics PhD student in a US university who qualified for the PhD level and waiting for the comprehensive  test.

In the first year of my PhD, I wasn't able to cope up with the pressure and  that caused bad grades. The result from first and second semester is below:

A, B, B ;  A, B+, B+.

In the second year,  I eventually  understood  the pressure and was able to cope up the  coursework pressure along with the  research pressure. And, eventually I did well  in the second year. My result is:

A, A, A  ; A+, A+, A

My question is how bad influence will my overall score appear to the academia and industry?

NOTE: My supervisor is pretty happy with my research work.

Academia and industry largely do not care about your grades as a graduate student. The only exceptions are certain large corporations that have cutoffs for the GPA for graduate as well as undergraduate studies. [I have worked for such a corporation, so this is not idle speculation.] Even then, such cutoffs are not absolute—if a hiring manager wants you badly enough, they can petition for the requirements to be waived.

Academia does not care about your grades: your promise as a successful researcher and colleague is the primary consideration in getting hired as a postdoc.


Conditional acceptance I just got a conditional admission from a highly prestigious master's programme in Europe but I have a question. What happens if I got conditionally accepted but I can't provide my diploma at a given time written in the letter? (because my graduation will be after the deadline). I already contacted with the university but it would be nice if you could share your experiences if you had something similar.

Thank you.

Every such case is individual and depends on the rules set in place. Contact both universities, actually. Perhaps your current institution can assure the new one that the diploma is certain to be issued by some date. Perhaps the new institution will accept that. But it is up to them.

I doubt that they will be especially finicky about the rules, but no one can say but them. Keep all of your other options open until things are finalized.

Even a letter from a professor might assure them that all is well.


Will publisher waive fee if currently unaffiliated? I am in between jobs and want to send a quick note to a journal. However, I do not have any lab to pay the ridiculous publishing fees, is there any way I can ask the journal to waive the publishing fees? Is being unaffiliated sufficient grounds for this?

This surely depends on the journal, and probably on your specific case (I don't imagine it's common to have a blanket waiver for authors without affiliation).    Many journals do provide support to authors without funding.  For instance, look at the PLOS FAQ #4:

https://www.plos.org/publications/publication-fees/

  Publication Fee Assistance is intended for authors who demonstrate financial need. [...] PLOS considers applications on a case-by-case basis.

Try looking at the webpages for journals you're considering for such information.  If you can't find anything, you can try contacting the journal.


Interpretation of "GRE subject test is required, but your application will be considered anyway" In the US, many PhD programs require applications to submit the results of one of the GRE subject tests. For example, almost every (serious) PhD program in mathematics that I've seen requires it. However, when looking at the admissions webpage of some programs, there sometimes seems to be some kind of grey area when it comes to the subject test.

For example, on Harvard's webpage for the mathematics PhD program, it is written that:

  The Department requires all applicants to submit GRE Mathematics Subject Test scores. Applicants should check on the ETS website for test dates in their area to insure the scores will be submitted before the application deadline.

So far so good, and if they left it at that, the message would seem to be: "you have to submit the GRE subject test, otherwise your application will be incomplete and rejected outright". However, it goes on to say:

  While the admissions committee reviews all applications submitted by the deadline, missing math subject test scores are one less data point available to evaluate the application. Depending on the applicant pool and the strength of the application materials, the missing subject test scores may put the application at a disadvantage.

How should one interpret this? Does it mean:

"We thank you for the $105 donation, but your application lacks critical information and will almost certainly be rejected"; or
"Your application will be considered, provided it somehow demonstrates that you have a sufficiently strong mathematics background to succeed in our program"?

One one hand, it seems possible that they would want to "consider" applications without the GRE subject test, in that they receive the admission fee and that they can discard the application with very little time and effort (after all, they said the GRE was necessary). On the other hand, it seems silly that Harvard should reject an applicant who, by all accounts, seems to be this generation's Terence Tao, for the simple reason that he did not take the GRE subject test.

This is certainly poorly and confusingly worded, but I think I can explain the reasoning based on similar issues I've seen with other departments.  Here's my interpretation:

The department expects every applicant to take the GRE subject test.  However, they know that every year a small fraction of the applicants screw up and don't manage to register in time to take it in the fall.  It's impossible to take the test at the last minute, so at that point there's no way to fix the situation.  The department doesn't want to automatically reject these applicants, for exactly the reason you mention (what if someone's the next Terry Tao?), and they are worried that if they list the GRE as an absolute requirement, then the university administration might force them to do that.  On the other hand, they also don't intend to offer applicants the discretion to decide for themselves whether taking the subject test would strengthen their applications.  They want everyone to take it, with the possibility of forgiveness for outstanding candidates who screw up.  These goals get combined into the confusing statement that it's mandatory but your application can still be considered without it.

I don't know how the Harvard math department evaluates applicants with no GRE scores, but I can tell you how my department does.  We're a little happier if we see an apologetic note about how the applicant intended to take the test but failed to do so in time, but of course we know such a note proves nothing.  Our default assumption is that the applicant was worried about doing poorly, so we start asking questions like "How badly would we guess they might have done?" and "Would we have accepted them anyway, even with low GRE scores?"  If the application is otherwise fantastic, then the chances of acceptance remain good.  However, these are the cases in which we would have cheerfully made excuses for low scores (maybe the applicant just isn't good at standardized tests or had a bad day), so nothing is gained by skipping the exam.  An otherwise marginal applicant with no GRE subject test score will be rejected, and a strong but not fantastic applicant will be at a disadvantage.

So my best guess as to what the policy means in practice is something like "if you don't take the exam, we'll be annoyed at your irresponsibility and we'll evaluate your application with a presumption that you wouldn't have done well on the exam, but we'll still consider admitting you."  This means you have a strong incentive to take the exam if you can.

  On one hand, it seems possible that they would want to "consider" applications without the GRE subject test, in that they receive the admission fee and that they can discard the application with very little time and effort

In a typical U.S. department, application requirements and graduate admissions decisions are handled pretty much entirely separately from application fees.  For example, many people on the committee won't even know offhand what the current application fee is or where the money goes within the university.  In particular, whoever wrote the policy about GRE scores probably wasn't thinking about application fees at all.