Journal rejects my conference-to-journal extension, saying it's copied from previous publication. What should I do? My understanding of short conference papers being extended to journals was that I should have at least 30% fresh results and content (read that in answers to this question here). I had a short 4-page paper published and presented as a poster at a conference in the past year. I had extended the work, had plenty of fresh results with me, and decided to send it to a journal. I would say I had at least 70-80% fresh content and results.

I was surprised to receive a reply from the Editor that my manuscript was been rejected without review. The reason given by an editorial board member is

  A non-negligible part of this manuscript (~1000 words) has been copied by a previous publication of these authors.

And, thus, he suggested that the manuscript be rejected without review.

I agree that some basic data pre-processing modules are same in both papers (coz why would they differ!). Some introduction and related work part is also the same. Rest, the manuscript is fresh. My manuscript is easily 9000-10000 words. 1000 words just makes 10% of that. Keeping in mind that "30% fresh content" rule, I thought I was playing pretty safe. But this response has disappointed me :(

My  questions:

Should I bother to write to the Editor, asking for a clarification? Maybe I can just ask whether the editor bothered to read my cover letter (where I had clearly mentioned about the previous paper, and the overlaps with this paper).
If yes, how does one usually contact the Editor? The emails sent by the journal do not come from a personal account. Will it be wise to write to him directly?
After this rejection, I may submit it elsewhere. But what if it gets rejected on same grounds. Should I consider re-writing my manuscript and making it completely different from the previous paper?

So you wrote in the cover letter that the work is an extended version of a conference paper that accompanied a poster presentation.

Apparently, this information got missing somewhere. Also this information should actually be in the paper, as Maarten van Wesel already wrote, as the later reader should be also be made aware of this.

So, judging from your post, the only thing that you did wrong was not to note this in the paper itself (please add a comment to this post if this assumption is wrong). What then went wrong in the journal's workflow is that the paper was rejected due to copying rather than asking you to add such a note in the paper. A possible explanation is that checking for plagiarism is done by the publisher's office beforehand, and they actually never saw (or read) the cover letter.

I think that it is fair to write a letter to the editor, mentioning that (1) you already wrote in the cover letter that you submitted extended work, and (2) you are of course happy to add a note that this is an extended work of [Previous work].

On a related note, there may be a small copyright problem. You may have already given an exclusive licence to distribute your work to one publisher with your earlier paper. If you now copy a good part of that work, the new publisher may see this as problematic. While many publishing agreements nowadays explicitly allow reuse of the work in extended versions, not all of them do, so the new publisher's office may suspect that this is not the case for your earlier paper. Coincidentally, many extended versions of papers are actually completely rewritten, which circumvents this problem altogether. Whether an extended version should be a full rewrite is yet another discussion, which we probably don't want to pursue in this thread.


What does it mean when a professor says that he'll pay me as a 'mission' for an internship? I applied for and got selected for a summer internship at a renowned research lab in Germany. The professor says they will try to fund all my expenses, but will pay me as a 'mission'. What does this mean? I have never heard of this phrase before.

In my experience, there are typically three methods for dealing with funding for a short- to medium-term visit:

Directly collect travel and living expense information (e.g., via receipts) and advance/recompense money to those documented expenses.  This can be quite painful to actually implement for anything more than about a week.
Take on the person as a short-term employee, paying them a sufficient wage that it is expected all told to cover their travel and living expenses.  This can often be complicated due to subsidiary problems with HR, hiring policy, etc., and may often be much more expensive for the host depending on how their overheads are calculated.
Give the person a lump sum of money that is expected to be large enough to cover their travel and living expenses.  This is the simplest method, but requires available money that is allowed to be used for this purpose, which is often hard to come by except in specific visiting scholar funds and the like.

My guess is that the statement about "mission" may be an unusual or mistranslated phrasing referring to the third type of funding.  The only way to know for certain, however, is to ask for clarification from the person who used the phrase.


Is it fair to reject manuscript with few words of comments after long 9 months of review? In January 2016 I had submitted my work to Elsevier mathematics journal. For 8 months they kept my manuscript under review and for one month under status 'Decision in process'. Now the editor responded rejection with comments like following; "The manuscript is of limited interest to the readership of this journal, and I can not recommend it for publication".
Is this fair to respond with such short review after such a long period of review ?

I am not in anyway want to justify that my work can not be rejected, but after such long wait I was expecting some decent comments.

I can't say about fairness, since the manuscript might be indeed of limited interest. On the other hand, I would have contacted the editor after two months under review.
It's possible that the manuscript had been forgotten either by the reviewers or by the editor.
But what seems to be quite probable in this case is that the editor might have been searching for reviewers, but none showed interest or kept giving up in the process. That would explain why there was no reviews attached to the answer (which is usually the case when the editor decides without reviewers feedback).


Do Fall Courses Count in PhD Admission? I am currently an undergraduate at a university. I am looking at graduate programs in Mathematics, and if I am applying for math graduate programs for the year 2014-2015, are fall courses (2013) taken into consideration for graduate applications?

If so, could you elaborate according to your knowledge and experiences. I'm sure this question is applicable to other graduate programs other than Mathematics, so any comments pertaining to this question would be appreciated.

The easiest way to tell if fall grades will be taken into account is to look at the application instructions. If you see instructions asking you to provide your mid-year grades, then that's a pretty clear indication that they will be taken into account during the admissions process. If you are not asked to submit it, then follow that guideline.

If it's optional for whatever reason, I would assume that you should plan as if it were a mandatory submission.


Is it a good idea to omit part of a multiple surname for publications? I'm about to publish my first article and from what I've been reading, everyone suggests that you should be consistent with the name you choose. My first name is "Sobhan" and my last name is "Omranian Khorasani". In my country, I always introduce myself as "Sobhan Omranian" and never mention the other part and I want to keep it that way in my academic career. The problem is that if I mention my full name, then I would be probably known as "S.O. Khorasani" which is unwanted.

My question would be, would I face any issues regarding my ID (e.g., university admission or applying for a job), if I omit the last part of my family name and then for the sake of uniqueness, add a middle name? (Something like "S.A. Omranian")

If yes, can I improvise and and add a hyphen between my multiple surnames? (Omranian-Khorasani) or are there better ways to achieve what I want.

In Spain we typically have a very similar situation: two surnames, with the first being considered the most "important" in the sense that if we need to omit one, we omit the second. For example, someone called Juan García González can be called Juan García or Mr. García for short, but never "Juan G. González" as most US-centric systems would abbreviate it.

The typical approaches most researchers take are either signing just Juan García (omitting the second surname), or adding a hyphen (Juan García-González) to fool the American databases into thinking they are a single surname. Typically the first solution is chosen by authors whose first surname is rare, and the second one by those whose first surname is common and who would have ambiguity problems if they used the first approach (e.g. García is extremely common, so there can be dozens of authors called J. García, and therefore signing as García-González is probably a better idea).

Lately, a Spanish governmental science foundation has adopted these approaches as official recommendations, and many universities have followed suit and recommended them to their personnel as well. It's in Spanish, but just in case you are curious or it can help anyone else, here is the recommendation guide describing this: https://www.um.es/documents/793464/2907606/Recomend+Fecyt+DOC051115-1.pdf/0a403f57-253f-4f07-9bdc-762ff5a9a557

Thus, I think you should be safe both as Sobhan Omranian or as Sobhan Omranian-Khorasani, and you can choose between both depending on whether S. Omranian is common or not. I don't think adopting a middle name in your "pen name" would be problematic either, as you can always provide evidence of authorship of your publications if needed. But I would stick to the simpler, tried solutions just in case. If they are considered to work in Spain and even recommended officially, they should work there too.


Does experience at a startup for a couple of years increase the chances of getting into a good Ph.D programme in a US university? Background:

I'm a non-US undergrad majoring in Computer Science. I will have published a couple of research papers in a few months before I graduate, have worked on a couple of research-based academic projects, made some significant contributions to a big FOSS project, have done an internship from a small US startup, and a project in a big company (the size of Microsoft, Yahoo) - kind of a university-company mentorship. I intend to pursue my Ph.D from a US university.

3 questions:

If I join a US startup after relocating to US, work there (coding work - PHP, Python, iOS development) for a year or two before taking the GRE test and applying to MS/Ph.D programmes, will it increase my chances? I really want to work at a startup and want to found my own.
What if the work at the startup is based on data analysis and machine learning (along the lines of which I intend to pursue my Ph.D)?
Also, does having already founded a small startup (supposing I've got an investor or two too) help my chances in gaining admission? Considering I will co-found my own startup anyway someday, for sure.

The answer to all of these questions and more is going to be: Maybe.

Experience will help, but testimonial in the form of reference letters will be better. If you work at this company and it gets you a dynamite reference letter, testifying to your skill, it may help you. On the flip side, for a PhD, skill may not be sufficient--- for a PhD your research background (what you already have) may be much more important than the work experience.


Australian Research Council (ARC) grants for overseas applicants I am currently a visiting assistant professor in Computer Science in the United States. I was wondering If there are any avenues (ARC programs) for someone like me to apply for research grants in Australia.

Assuming you are willing to move to Australia, you could apply for one of the ARC fellowships.  You would need to find a host institution.  If your doctorate was awarded recently, DECRA would the best program for you.


What is a bachelor of Engineering (Honours) and Master of Engineering Context: I am high school student in Australia and currently applying for university 2021. I am interested in engineering and I came across this "bachelor OF Engineering (Honours) and Master of Engineering" program provided by University of Queensland.
I always thought that you need a bachelor's degree to get a master’s degree? It seems to me that this program integrates Master's coursework with bachelor's? Does that mean that if I successfully completed this program in 5 years, I will graduate with a bachelor and a master degree?
UQ program link - https://future-students.uq.edu.au/study/programs/bachelor-engineering-honours-and-master-engineering-2350

Yes, if you graduate this course you will get both a bachelor's of engineering (honours) and a masters of engineering, however this will take longer (as in 5 years rather than the normal 4 years for an engineering degree).
If you look at the AQF (Australian Qualification Framework) level you'll see that its level 9, which is a masters degree. Level 7 is bachelor degree, level 8 is bachelor (honours degree) and level 10 is PhD.
Normally (in the Australian framework) you get a bachelor degree in 3 years then you can do an honours degree on top of that which is an extra year. Rather than doing a honours degree you could instead do a masters degree which was often 1.5 to 2 years long. Some universities only offer masters degrees and for some universities a masters degree is essentially some upper year course from the bachelor degree plus an honours degree (though this also depends on the field). After either an honours (which is sometimes mixed with the bachelor degree) or a masters you can apply for a PhD, however places in Europe don't always recognise an honours degree as it would be recognised in Australia.
This degree in particular started about 10 years ago the University of Queensland started a combined masters/bachelors course for engineering (I know some people from the first cohort). This is essentially the bachelor of engineering course plus the requirements for a masters, including a research thesis which you don't need for the bachelor of engineering (honours).


Should I provide feedback to a PhD application I have received? I usually reply to e-mails from students asking for PhD positions to let them know if I am interested or if they are competitive / up to standards for continuing with an application but this tends to be more on the admin / funding and suitability to my lab. Yesterday, I received one such PhD application and the project / research proposal was so outside the "state-of-the-art" (effectively the proposal was to research something that already exists as a commercial product) that I think I should also comment on that.

Should I let the student know and give him some feedback (which is going to be on the harsh side) about his proposal. Is it common or should I not bother at all? To be clear, I have no intention of considering the application.

You will do the student a kindness if you send feedback.  Try not to be harsh.  Perhaps something like, "Did you know that company X already makes product Y that appears to incorporate what you have proposed as research?  That being the case, I'm sorry but your proposal is not suitable for my lab."


Why become a journal editor? I know peer-reviewing research papers is a lot of work, but it is something that as a scientist in academia you must do. However, you are not required to become an editor of a journal. It seems to be tons of work, and I am trying to understand what people gain from it and whether it is worth the effort.

I mean, I can understand how being an editor for Science or Cell would be helpful in terms of prestige, connections, and exposure to top science, but what about for lesser known journals? And how is that integrated with research and other duties?

As you alluded to in your question, there are several things to be gained by being a journal editor:

Greater familiarity with ongoing research in your field
Credit for "service" within your department institution
Greater visibility within your research community
In some cases, monetary compensation (some editor positions are paid, some are unpaid)

Being a journal editor can be a very time-consuming job, and it's certainly not for everyone. However, it can also be an interesting and rewarding experience, even if it's not a journal at the level of Science or Cell. (Then again, many of the journals at the level of Science have in-house professional editors, rather than part-time staff from academia!)

Editing a minor journal can also offset other forms of outreach service, particularly if you are still developing a tenure dossier. In those situations you may find editing more (or less) rewarding than the duties you would take on (or be assigned) otherwise. (You should check with your department chair, however, that such service would be considered acceptable before committing to a position!)

Whether or not the connections are worth it at a particular level of journal is not something we can directly answer. You should consider the time commitments relative to other priorities that you might have, and make a decision accordingly.


Business School professors - how different are they? I recently saw a listing of professor salaries at various departments in Stanford. I found that the folks at GSB earn significantly more than what other Dept. people do. This is the motivation for my question:

How different are B-school professors? Many of them work on areas that lie on the intersection of Operations/CS/Economics/Applied Math. But why do they enjoy a greater pay (if at all they do)?
Are industry contacts available easier for B-school faculty when compared with engineering or science department professors? What sort of projects do B-school professors work on in collaboration with the industry? How is the pay-sharing deal between the industry, the prof and the university worked out?
How different is teaching MBA students from engg. or science undergrad students? Does teaching MBA eat up more time or is more demanding than usual?

I can address questions 1 and 2 (although for 3, all I know is that my friends say it is very different).

When you are negotiating over salary, your leverage is determined by the best alternative you have.  To keep from losing you to another employer, your job must offer a better combination of pay and benefits than anyone else (including benefits like job security, having interesting colleagues and students, having flexible hours and the ability to choose your own projects, etc.).

People in the humanities have very little leverage except from other academic jobs.  Mathematicans have more, because there are applications in industry or government, so they get paid somewhat more, but this leverage is limited by the fact that many mathematicians don't want non-academic jobs.  Computer scientists have a lot of leverage, and business school faculty have even more.

So basically it comes down to this.  Business school faculty often have expertise that is in high demand outside academia and could earn them a lot of money, and there's at least a stereotype that they care more about monetary compensation than some professors do (which makes sense, given their interest in business).  This means that to attract excellent faculty, business schools have to pay enough that job applicants would rather work there than in the business world.

In principle, this is no different from other departments: literature faculty also have to be paid enough that they don't leave for the business world.  It's just a question of how much that is.
This really depends on the subfield.  Business school faculty are certainly more likely to do outside consulting than scientists are, but there are no universal rules (some business school professors do none at all, and some scientists run their own companies).  Occasionally, a company will sponsor a university program according to some negotiated agreement, but consulting generally does not involve a pay-sharing deal.  Instead, the faculty member simply consults part-time for the company, without using university resources, and is paid directly by the company.  In the US, universities typically allow a certain amount of time to be spent on outside consulting, for example one day per week, with no special approval needed.


Cases of plagiarism in mathematics Are there known cases of plagiarism in mathematics? The writing practices in mathematics are clearly different from the writing practices in the humanities. In the latter area I roughly know how to characterize plagiarism because examples are known. But I do not know how plagiarism is possible in mathematics, except for blunt copies of text.

Do you know about examples how plagiarism in mathematics looks like?

The American Maths Society has been caught:

A plagiarised book on maths history.

Another notorious case concerned an Eastern European academician in the bad old days. He began with a bit of self-plagiarism, re-publishing his own works in English language journals. But then he moved on to translating and publishing as his own papers from Russian journals. He was exposed when a Russian mathematician, on moving/escaping to Paris, discovered that his best theorems had been stolen. I think the AMS published an analysis of the whole sad affair.


Just graduated bachelors comp sci. Didn't get into MS. Confused what to do I just recently graduated university with a bachelors in computer science. I did not participate in the career fairs at my uni,  because I wanted to apply for MS in US/Canada, even though everyone told me to have a backup option. Unfortunately, I did not get admit for any of the MS Programs I applied to. Now I'm not sure what to do. I want to apply next year again but I'm just afraid now.

My parents told me to get a job right now - but my problem is that I have really low confidence. First, not getting an admit really threw off my morale. And also, I'm really bad with interviews. I throw up before each one. I am very socially awkward. Even thinking about an interview makes me want to puke and gives me headaches and fear. Another thing is, I haven't had any revision/practice in almost 2 years - with the DS Algo OS DBMS stuff that they ask in the interviews. This makes me hate the technical interviews even more.

I'm thinking to take a gap year... revise my courses, practice interviewing by applying for jobs, learning ML from MOOCs (and maybe write a paper), and doing some volunteer work in the following year.

Will taking a gap hurt my career or my MS application?

Get a job. You write that you have really low confidence, are really bad with interviews, are socially awkward, etc. These are not reasons to not get a job. The point is that even if you had been admitted, you will still have to get a job after you finish your MS degree. Since you will have to face these demons eventually, you might as well do it now. These things may be scary, but they can also be conquered (see Workplace.SE for more advice). It can even be a blessing in disguise - you might decide that you'd rather keep working than go to graduate school. Remember also that the longer you wait, the less employable you become.

You could take a gap year also and do all the stuff you mentioned, but you would be spending money without earning it. That is not sustainable. Unless you are independently wealthy, you would be burdening your caregivers for an extra year. Your caregivers are likely much older than you (i.e. they need to think about their own retirement). Meanwhile you'd be spending one of the best years of your life on things with uncertain long-term benefits. Is that responsible behavior to you?

You can't postpone growing up forever. Get a job.


How do I motivate myself to study a subject when the teacher couldn't care less about teaching it So I am a Computer Science major final year under-graduate student.

I am studying 4 classes at the moment, and sadly, don't feel really good about any of them. The subjects are good, I love Computer Science, in general, but the teaching has been below average. The classes only consist of teachers coming to the class, reciting bullet points written on the PowerPoint, and leaving.

To make things worse, almost all of them expect us to write exactly as the prescribed text-book, even a different notation is frowned upon.

This is really getting on my head, because:

I am trying to learn (cram?) what is required for the exam, and I kind of suck at it.
I feel like I am ditching myself - because I learn nothing out of it.

I am starting to develop medical problems, like headaches, high blood pressure because of all the stress - the stress of doing things exactly as in the text book.

So I want to ask what is the most appropriate step to take in such a case? Have you experienced anything like this before? How did you cope with it?

Today is September 16.  If you move fast you may be able to switch to some better-taught classes.

My guess is you are past the drop-add deadline.  You may need to get approval from someone quite high up.  You may need to assert yourself.

Step one is to look at what other courses are being offered this semester that would fit into your program of studies and your interests.  Step two is to visit those classes.  You should arrive five minutes early, introduce yourself to the instructor before class, and give some simple white lie such as "I'm thinking of signing up for this class next year; do you mind if I sit in today?"

If you fall in love with the class and the instructor, then at the end, when you thank him or her for letting you sit in, you should come clean and say that you would like to add the course to your schedule.  Don't say anything about the other course you would be dropping.  Say, "If I can get administrative approval to add this class after the deadline, would that be all right with you?  I would work very hard to catch up on all the material that's been covered so far.  I have a such-and-so GPA."

If the instructor seems pressed for time, just say thank you and ask if you might contact him or her later with a follow-up question.

It's your education.  It's fine for you to be pro-active and advocate for yourself, with polite persistence.

Edit: I just re-read your question and saw that you are an undergrad.  I will now have to vote to close.  Sorry.


How can I build a competitive application for a PhD? Thank you all in advance!

I have the intention to apply for a PhD within the next year to start in Fall 2019.

I have an undergraduate degree in Finance and was selected best finance student of the university upon graduation. On top of that, I was a student-athlete on a soccer scholarship and made it to the all conference academic team each and every year, finishing my degree with a 3.74 GPA.

After that, I completed a MBA from a AACSB accredited school as graduate assistant for the department of Finance. Apart from working in the finance department, I also worked in a research center for Sport security, mainly doing analysis more than research.

Now, I have been working for 1 year as an operations specialist for a financial insititution. My first question is, does this make me a competeitive individual for a PhD? I was thinking of doing it in Politics, Political economy, or economics. Is there anything else I can do during this next year to make my candidacy Stronger? What kind of jobs can I look for to get that extra experience? Where could I publish my own article or my own work to add it to my candidacy?

On another note, one of the requirements to apply is to submit writing sample, is it possible to send some article of publication of my own, or should I send something I wrote in school?

Currently, I am working on my GRE examen to make sure I am in at least the 90th percentile.

Sorry for the length of the question, but I wanted to give a clear overview of my Situation.

Thank you very much.

The American Economics Association has compiled a list of professors’ blog entries and departmental advice pages on the topic of pursuing a PhD in Economics: https://www.aeaweb.org/resources/students/grad-prep/considerations

One you might find especially useful is Chris Blattman’s, whose work is at the intersection of politics and economics: https://chrisblattman.com/about/contact/gradschool/


Change of research field I am an undergrad physics student and my research experience has mainly been in the field of Condensed Matter Physics. Through the experience I have come to realize that it is not what I want to continue with and wish to change my specialization when I apply for my masters. If I were to contact an advisor from a field different from the one I have some experience working in to join a group for say a Research Masters, will the experience (despite it being in a different field) work in my favour?

Will the experience (despite it being in a different field) work in my favour?

Yes.  You will be showing that you are careful and meticulous in lab work, that you follow instructions and follow safety procedures, that you figure things out, that you correctly apply what you have been taught, that you are creative, that you have initiative, that you understand the scientific method, that you document your work, that you know how to take careful measurements and analyze your data, etc. etc.


Do educational programmes need to be in italics within the Harvard system of referencing? I am mentioning  educational programmes within my essay and wonder if I need to have the name of the programme in italics? (For example, the Wellmother programme.)

Also I have mentioned a Government document, Midwifery 20/20 in the essay and wonder if this needs to be in italics?

In general, italics would not necessarily be used just to represent the name of something. You wouldn't write "the Marshall Plan", so you wouldn't write "Wellmother programme", either.

As for the government publication, that's a different matter altogether. If the document is a "stand-alone" publication, as most such works are, then it should be italicized as if it were a book. So, this could also extend to a program if it were announced as a formal document, rather than just a policy position.


While doing PhD I did not consider the job prospects or requirements in my field. Will it be alright to ask my advisor for help with career path? I made a huge mistake while doing my Ph.D. I did my Ph.D. on a topic that I was excited about but did not feel confident in. And lo behold, I got a Ph.D. in 5.5 years with skillset, which is not at par with the requirements of the openings in my area of research (computational modelling of the additive manufacturing process).
My research involved fairly simple methodology. I can publish many papers on my topic or research area in decent journals as there are several open ended questions, but that won't get me any tenure track position or industry job.
The majority of publications or grants in my research area is for experimental research. Computational research is not that hard to do and also does not get standalone grants. I should have carried out some experimental research during my Ph.D., but I was always hesitant to propose it to my bosses.
Now after graduating, I am realizing the slim prospects of landing a job with my skillset and CV. I want to do some experiments in my Postdoc position with my Ph.D. advisor. Also, I need some contacts for my next move. Will it be alright to ask my Ph.D. advisor (now postdoc advisor) for help with defining my career path?
Edit: The reason I am asking this because I am hesitant to blurt out my insecurities and my issues to my professor. I have good relationship with my advisor, I don't know if I should bother him with this.

Most advisors don't know how to get jobs outside of academia, it's kind of humorous how delusional many of them are.


Are doctoral programs in the USA like a Masters leading into a PhD? Before I begin, feel I should make it clear that I have no doubt that undertaking a PhD. anywhere, let alone at Harvard, will be a difficult and strenuous task!

To briefly explain, I have graduated with a good Bachelors of Arts from the UK, and am set to do my Research Masters in Holland. However, I have been in contact and have contacted the literature faculties in Harvard, who have been very encouraging but, to be honest, the system itself seems very different.

To clarify, I'll copy in some of what my (possible) supervisor has emailed me:

Our students enter the program, take two or three years of courses, and only then settle on a dissertation topic and choose a committee of three faculty -- one primary advisor and two other readers.

This sounds at once much more fluid and liberal a way of doing things, but, considering the ridiculous costs of studying in the USA, I'm not sure how leisurely that would be in reality! Should I assume that Doctoral programs in the USA are like a Masters leading into a PhD? Is there a scholarship available for both of these?
Has anyone reading this had any experience on the matter, and can relate more clearly how this process works, and whether exceptions are every possible?

The quoted description is pretty standard for how Humanities departments in the US work. Most students entering Humanities PhD programs in the States do not have MA degrees, although a significant proportion of those from the UK do. It would be unlikely that you could skip those first 2-3 years of coursework. Even if you could, it would put you at a serious disadvantage even if you knew in advance what topic you wanted to research. A 1-year UK MA degree, just does not prepare you to the same extent as 2-3 years of coursework.

As for funding, the top students are likely guaranteed funding for some number of years. The funding will likely require some teaching. The teaching maybe in the form as a TA, but is likely to be much more extensive and require you to design and run a large undergraduate lecture class. For those students, the funding will cover tuition and a stipend. Those without guaranteed funding can still get funding for teaching, but you cannot count on it. How tuition is handled depends on the university/department and where you are in the program.

In the Humanities, it is unlikely that any supervisors will have grants that pay for PhD students, but there are grants that you can apply directly for. Some of these cover students in the first few years, but most are for more senior students.

For US PhD programs in the Humanities, unlike in the Sciences, funding should play a huge role in your decision of where to go. In the Sciences, everyone essentially has funding that covers tuition and living expenses and very little teaching. In the Humanities, self funded students and students with with huge teaching requirements are common. There is a huge difference in productivity and happiness between those who have to take out loans, that they will likely never be able to pay back, or teach and those who do not.


Does getting pay to be a subject in an experiment violate an F1 visa in the US? I am in a university in the US. I need 10 subjects for a 2-hour experiment. The compensation is 100 USD. If a subject is an international grad student on an F1 visa in my university, will it go against the terms of his F1 visa, which restricts his ability to work in the US?

You need to ask the international students' office at your university, because

It's a delicate legal issue of the type they are trained to navigate, and
The answer may depend on the particulars of how the university handles its students and how your experiment handles compensation, and
The answers to these questions change frequently, as visa and immigration regulations mutate.

Even if somebody on this site could give a correct answer and take legal responsibility for it, it would not be safe for somebody else to rely on it in the future.


Conducting exams in which a computer (but no internet) is available In my institution, we have various lab exams in which part of the exam is completing a programming task, and a computer is available to each student for this purpose.

There are there various ways to submit the exercise then: for instance, files can be submitted through a dedicated web service (elegant and easy to use, but it needs to be coded by hand and the grading is more complicated if there is also a pen-and-paper part to match), or the student is asked to copy the program/function on paper (tedious, but simple to implement).

Clearly, in this exam format it would be desirable to limit access to the internet, to reduce the possibilities to cheat and (in exams where this is forbidden) look up external information. This task seems complicated because

some network access is necessary for the computer infrastructure to work (for instance, network logon)
some programs may require additional network access: for instance, Matlab campus installations usually require access to a "license server" installed on a university-controlled machine
the exam itself may also require the network somehow: for instance, to download test files, or for the interface to submit exercises mentioned above.

My experience is that IT administrators are reluctant to provide something like this, and that the result is quite error-prone: limiting the network access is tricky to do, it often fails and usually it leaves room for loopholes (for instance, the students can still chat to each other with netcat). Ideally, a fully locked-down "exam mode" would also have some more features, like forbidding access to USB sticks, but this also must be implemented by hand.

With this premise, my questions are:

Is this way of conducting exams common also in other institutions/university systems/nations? Is it inherently bad, or does it have some pitfalls that I have overlooked?
Is there an easy way to implement a "locked-down exam mode" on a computer (with either of Windows, Mac, and Linux, or rather, possibly, all of them) by using standard products? Are they effective, or are they easy to circumvent? Or does everyone roll their own hand-crafted solution? Some operating systems ofter "guest modes", which are a good starting point, but some more configuration is needed.
Is it normal for us teachers to ask the IT service to hack together something to implement this mode? Are there any technology suggestions that we can give them to make it more effective?
Should I (as an instructor) expect this "locked down exam mode", once implemented, to work seamlessly out-of-the-box, or is it something that is inherently clunky and error-prone?

My university in the UK provides such "locked down exam mode". Students log in with special "exam accounts", while their normal accounts are disabled for the time being. Exam accounts have limited access to network, permitting access to the University network (including submission servers, licensing servers, and other necessary infrastructure), and restricting access to anything else. This has been working well for the last 10-ish years at least, and I have not heard any major complaints from IT staff about it. For comparison, the same IT staff found it difficult to install TexLive on all university computers and were reluctant to perform this task.


How can I identify research opportunities I am qualified for, and position myself as a competitive candidate, in a different field from my degree? I currently have a BSc. in Environmental Science and would like to go back for a biology focused PhD in the next few years. I keep seeing the recommendation that having a good research fit will be important to potentially being admitted.

My question is, how do I go about getting research experience in biology when my degree is in something unrelated?

Answers to the question on How to gain research experience after master program? suggest various possible research opportunities. I've looked at jobs and volunteer opportunities like those, but I'm not sure I'm qualified for them. Even when I find a job that says ‘no experience necessary’, they are still asking for a biology degree. Presumably anyone with one would have had some experience in a biology lab, whereas most of my lab experience is in geology labs.

I don't understand why they would take someone without a relevant degree or experience (even if it's in-class experience) over interns, under/grad students, various types of volunteers with relevant degrees. Without understanding that, I'm not sure how to approach people about these potential opportunities.

How can I identify research opportunities I am qualified for, and position myself as a competitive candidate for these positions, when I don't have a relevant degree or experience in the field?

Frankly, most undergraduate students (and new graduates) are under-qualified to do research in any field, including their own. For various altruistic and non-altruistic reasons, we're often willing to take them on anyways.

When I hire an undergraduate or M.S. student to work in my research group, I look for qualities that tell me they'll be train-able, and also a good investment for me. Things like:

motivation (as demonstrated by showing that they actually know what we are currently working on, have looked at our publications before asking for a job, etc.)
interest in pursuing graduate studies related to my field of research
soft skills (oral and written communication, organization, note-taking, etc.)
ability to learn new concepts and skills quickly and somewhat independently
basic quantitative and technical ability

I don't expect anybody I hire at this level to have relevant experience or experimental skills specific to my lab, whether they have a degree in the field or not.

So, keep pursuing opportunities like these, be honest about your lack of a biology degree, but highlight your eagerness to learn and your "transferable" abilities.

You might also look for research opportunities in cross-disciplinary labs that combine your new interest (biology) with your previous degree (environmental science). For these opportunities, your degree might actually give you a competitive advantage over biology students.


What are the tradeoffs involved in taking a postdoc at a top university versus an assistant professorship at a non-top university? When it comes to getting a tenure-track position where one has both a lot of resources and academic freedom to do what one wants to do (so having a tenure-track position in a top university might be more useful because one may get more resources at a top university).

Or in short, when one wants to maximize one's chances of becoming a "top scientist".

There are obviously numerous factors, and "rank/prestige" should not be considered as a factor in itself. That said, the period after one gets a PhD is an extremely important time for building up connections, and those are easier to get at a top university.

Getting experience at a top university is good for your CV and for you as a researcher.
Getting more research experience under your belt can increase your chance of getting a job in the future, but there are no guarantees.
A post-doc will give you a chance to write more papers and to find out what topic you really want to do your research on.
Taking the assistant professorship now would get you immediately on the track to full professor, which may be delayed if you spend years doing a post doc.
Working at a non-top university might mean that the students you have access to, for example, as RAs or PhD students, to develop your research vision, will not be as good as at the top university. That said, as a post-doc, you will generally not have access to such students anyway, except perhaps as part of a collaboration.
The pressure to succeed at a top university is much greater than at a non-top university.


As a post-doc applicant, should I address a professor by their first name in email after they addressed me that way? Regarding a post-doc position, I recently wrote to a professor in the US by starting my mail "Dear Professor X" where X is the surname and she replied to me "Hello Y" where Y is my first name.
I am hesitating if I should start always with "Dear Professor Y1" where Y1 is her first name.
I did not find any satisfactory answer by searching here. Personally, I would choose the second option, starting by her first name but I am not sure if there is any social norm for that? What is the best appropriate way?

Continue to use the surname until explicitly given permission to do otherwise. One way for her to give that permission, actually, would be to sign a mail with only her first name.

There is a power imbalance between you. She is probably not being entirely correct in assuming she can use your first name, but it is common for people in authority to take some liberties.

But I'd recommend keeping it a bit formal until that obviously no longer works. And my full name is "Bobby Buffy" then I'd never be Professor Bobby. It would either be Professor Buffy or just Bobby. (For the record, though, I'm not Bobby.)

Note that this answer may not apply everywhere. It has a US perspective.


Inclusion of GRE score/completion on CV - under which heading? First of all, yes I know people have asked questions over whether or not to include the GRE score on here, and the answer is generally no. If you're already in a (US or Canada) grad school.

I would argue my case is different. I took the GRE less than a year ago and did well, with the plan to attend the grad school at Notre Dame. I'm from the UK and ended up heading to Germany to undertake a PhD. After the PhD (if I complete) there's a high likelihood I will apply for Postdoctoral / teaching positions in the US. So my question to you all is:

Let's say I've completed (or are on track to complete) my PhD by the time potential employers at universities or research institutions in the US see my application. Would they like to see / would it help their judgement of my aptitude if my GRE score was on there? [Regarding expiry of the scores, I sat the GRE in Spring 2019 and am scheduled to finish my PhD in Summer 2022; I don't remember the expiry time]. But in my mind, it might be good to simply include the fact that I sat and completed it.
Under which heading on my CV would I include it? Education, Qualifications, Advanced Training?

My feeling is that unless you did phenomenally well (well within top 5%), it would not be of much relevance to those looking at your application (the likely effect would be this), and if you did do phenomenally well, then its inclusion could have the same effect as mentioning having an IQ score of 160 or more (something you'd probably not want to do, even if you did have such a score). Employers at universities or research institutions want to see evidence of teaching competence and/or research competence, not a high score on a test designed to measure your potential to do well in classwork, since presumably none of your duties will involve taking classes for a grade.


In a math talk, is it better to display the number of slides left? In a math talk (at a seminar or a conference, not teaching) that uses projected slides, is it better to display the number of slides left or not? What are the pros and cons? Some people tell me they like it, others prefer when it doesn't appear. I'd like to have some objective comments about this.

For some context, talks in math are typically one hour long, so the number of slides can be large. I like to cut talks into a few short sections. Right now I'm using the following layout, displayed at the top of every slide (from the "Frankfurt" beamer theme):

The current slide in the current section is highlighted, as well as the title of the current section.

Halmos advises that in preparing a talk you should have a block of material that you can omit if you are running short of time.  But if the slides show number of pages left, you cannot do that invisibly.  For example: in an hour lecture, if you are 5 minutes from the end of the hour, but your numbering shows you are only halfway through your slides, the audience will be getting restless.


"Post-Postdoc" Independent Researcher with Office in University? I knew a foreigner in the astronomy department at the university here who was a "post-postdoc" independent researcher. How could she have her own office in the astronomy department as an independent researcher?

Many universities offer positions with titles such as "research professor" or "staff scientist" or other similar titles. These all indicate the same basic phenomenon: a researcher who is generally supported by "soft money" (In other words, a position subject to sufficient funding), but who is otherwise more or less "permanent" staff. Such scientists may or may not have their own dedicated office space, depending upon overall space constraints within the department and within their boss's research group.


Can someone explain European graduate programs in STEM fields? I'm a US undergraduate in math and physics and I'm looking to ultimately do a PhD in either physics or math. It seems that a lot of the research I connect with the most is happening in Europe. I also like the focus on research rather than coursework in European PhD programs. However, I've found most of the process confusing for an outsider like me.

I would like to know the ins and outs of how graduate programs work over there. There's different lingo there, for example: Taught vs Research MSc. Which is better ultimately for a PhD program? I also get the feeling that Master's and PhD in Europe mean something totally different than what we mean in the US. Are there funded Master's programs in Europe (in math/physics) as there are in the US? How does funding compare?

For reference, I've been looking at schools in UK, Germany, and Switzerland (although not so much Switzerland due to the high cost of living).

Thanks!

Edit: I'm now aware of how broad my question is. Nevertheless, I found much of your advice helpful in gaining a general knowledge of how to pursue postgraduate degrees abroad and some additional considerations, so thanks! If/when I have more specific questions about this process I will ask them in a different thread.

I can give you some insight in Germany/Austria (phd in physics in Austria), not so much on the UK. Many countries in Europe now use the Bologna system
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bologna_Process#Qualifications_framework

It is normally a three step process for a phd: Bachelor programs is more or less equivalent to US undergrad, takes 3 years normally (all numbers with some variation depending on country and field) and ends with a bachelor degree BSc. Step two is a Master program, duration normally two years and mostly course orientated. Normally ends with a master's thesis, which involves independent research in a group under the supervision of a professor. This is a requirement for entering stage three, the phd. In general there is no funding for the master's years (maybe some for the half year during your thesis or if you TA), you are considered a student. Tuition fees depend on country/university and can be waived with stipends if you qualify (no fees in Austria though)

PhD is almost exclusively research in a specific research group and normally fully funded. Minimum duration is three years.

You see, that what you call graduate studies/phd in the US is separated into Masters and PhD in Europe, you obtain a Masters degree in the middle.

This also means that the application process is very different depending on stage. Let's say you want to start your masters in STEM in Europe. Setting visa considerations aside, for some universities you can just sign up for a Masters in Physics for instance, no entry exams. Some might require exams and charge you tuition fees.

One your done with you Masters, you can look for phd positions at either the same University or wherever you like. The availability of positions is tied to funding, which is normally under control of the leading professor of the group. So you apply to her/him and if they like you they can hire you. In most cases you don't have to get accepted by the university, you just enroll. A professor has to accept you. (Very different to the US). Often, you end up doing your phd within the group you wrote your master's thesis in.

On top of that there are graduate schools with extra funding where you apply to the program and the will assign you a supervisor.

So overall: Bacc-Master-Phd; 3-2-3 years


When is it a good idea to let an academic department (or a professor) know that I have Asperger's (or ADD)? With Asperger's, the trick is always when to explain it (in a non-awkward situation). I'd like to avoid mentioning it if possible, but it has gotten to the point that I only mention it after committing a major social faux pas, in which case it might be seen as an excuse.

With ADD, this is an issue that happens when people explain things to me. I often don't parse things very well when they're communicated to me verbally since I do have attention lapses. That's the major issue, anyways.

With that said, I do (indirectly) imply that I have both diagnoses on my personal website.

I agree with aeismail's answer, however I would just add that you might need be careful about the perception of your condition(s), especially the negative aspects. For instance, with the ADD, it's better to ask people to send written copies because you have a visual memory, because it's a constructive remark, rather than saying that you don't fully understand verbal explanation. Myself, I ask people to send emails about important things, and I clearly state that it's due to my great visual memory and my terrible auditive memory.

In other words, I think it's a good idea to inform people that you have Asperger or ADD, especially those you work closely with, but it's more important to explain the positive aspects rather than just stating your condition.


Is it wise to upload all the publshed research works to the Standard Paper Repository of Turnitin? My organization is using Turnitin software and I am the Administrator. Will it be a wise decision to upload all our published research works to the Standard Paper Repository of the software in order to avoid plagiarising of them in the future?

You should get legal advice regarding the consequences, and the intellectual property, legal or ethical issues that may arise from uploading your research, or student work, to their database.

The Turnitin blog seems to indicate that whatever documents you upload to the Standard Paper Repository will be further used (capitalized) to serve other customers:

  Opting to store papers in the standard paper repository contributes to report accuracy around the world; this is because papers submitted to your assignment will be added to our global database, allowing future submissions to any institution to match against your students' papers.

Several concerns have surfaced about these practices:

"Turnitin: If you're a student, all your intellectual property might belong to us"
"Anti Turnitin manifesto calls for resistance to some technology"
et cetera...


Should tenured researchers be "encouraged" (forced) to retire at a certain age? While thinking about this recent question, I was reminded of an issue at two different institutions I've taught at, as well as a third institution I am aware of via my father.

One complication I have seen at each of these universities is a number of professors who are well into their 70s (or even 80s), yet who refuse to retire. Obviously retirement is a personal decision that has no one-size-fits-all answer. However, I saw several instances of these professors causing "log-jams" in terms of resources and departmental turnover. For example, a professor who oversaw a lab next to my father's had "owned" his lab for something like 50 years. He did his research in there, brought in subsistence level funding, and "taught" a class every other semester (meaning his PhD students taught the course). He took up an entire lab and resisted anyone "encroaching" on his space. University administration placed pressure on him over some of these issues and he would usually (with much gnashing of teeth) comply in the minimally sufficient way. He never gave them enough cause to actually fire him. Because he had been with the university so long and was tenured, they could not fire him outright on account of his age alone.

In another instance, this time at one of my own universities, we had three professors who were about 85 years-old. They fulfilled their minimal teaching responsibilities (chosen in order of seniority in the department), but had each last published a paper about 5 years prior (with ~5 papers combined between them in the last decade). They sought next to no funding. They just squatted in their positions. The department could not hire any new professors until a position was vacated. By the time these professors finally retired (or died, in the case of one), there was a seven year gap between recent hires. This meant that there were exactly two professors who were not yet tenured, with one of them currently being evaluated for final tenure decisions. The department is struggling with stagnation now due to almost no turnover in their faculty. In the next five years or so, a number of professors in the department will reach age 65-70 ('retirement age'), meaning that within the next 5-7 years, the department will be comprised of ~65% untenured, assistant professors. As such, the department has been forced to attempt to recruit some established professors away from their current tenured positions at other universities (or have professors stick around well past retirement age, which caused the whole issue in the first place).

I also observed this phenomenon when I was applying to post-docs. Some universities wanted to hire tenure-track faculty, but instead had to hire post-docs in order to cover departmental teaching loads. In many instances, this leads to significant departmental instability in terms of continuity. Departments usually can't make a post-doc the graduate coordinator or even have them sit on committees (thesis/dissertation, curriculum, scheduling). This in turn places a larger burden on the existing faculty.

To be clear, these departments have policies in place that enforce certain productivity levels. These professors adhere to these policies, albeit barely. Yes, the standards could be raised, however, we also are trying to strike a balance between encouraging good research/teaching and enforcing a long list of rules and commandments.

My question is thus as follows: Should universities start including a clause in professors' contracts that mandates a certain retirement age?  Or at the very least, what are some practices a department can adopt that will mitigate issues of professors who work well past standard retirement age?

Here in Germany, professors are public servants and automatically retire when reaching retirement age. This has the equally automatic consequence that they are not paid a wage out of the university budget any more but a pension. And pensions of public servants work the way that any money they earn is subtracted from the pension.
Thus retired professors are typically (as long as they don't mess up the working atmosphere of the department) a net gain: any lecture they hold is essentially for free, any exams they take administer (they keep the ability to act as examiner) save work for someone else in the department. OTOH, they typically have to move into some small office, and can keep lab space only if they have grant/3rd party money to pay for that.


What to do after failing out of grad school? So I'm technically a graduate student. My school allows people who are studying a certain subject apply to the graduate program early, so if you get in, you get to work on your master's at the same time as finishing your bachelor's degree. Anyway, I applied and got in. I am also only 20. So the plan was to graduate with both degrees by the time I was 22. Here's the thing though, I think I'm going to be academically dismissed. The rules are that you cannot a C in more than one class. I got a C in my last class and it looks like I'm going to get a C in this class too unless I somehow get a 98% on the final. Unlikely, but I guess anything is possible.

So my question is, what do I do if I fail out? I don't have my bachelor's yet. I'm only 20 and if I'm being completely honest, I don't think this is something that I want to do anymore. I'm just not passionate and my level of caring is so low. It's probably why my grades are so bad. I just don't care anymore. I just can't deal with the fact that I'm probably going to fail out.

Welcome to the real world.

If you can still get a bachelor's degree, I strongly recommend you do it. The number of jobs that require a bachelor's degree is much larger than the number of jobs that require a masters (which is in turn larger than those that require a PhD). If you can't get a bachelor's degree, you'll really have wasted a lot more years of time and will probably be forced into an uninteresting low-pay job.

The next thing to do is look for a job. Use your local job repositories or job search portals. Figure out what you want to do, and approach the companies in that area to see if they're hiring. If you don't know what you want to do, then look for jobs that require the skills you have. For example if you're trained in psychology, look for jobs that require a degree in psychology. You should also use your network. When I left my previous job, the vacated position literally "fell into" the lap of my replacement. I told my Honours supervisor I was resigning, and she recommended my replacement.

Then prepare a CV that caters to non-academics, stressing what you learned in university. Especially emphasize the transferable skills. For example if you learned the programming language C++ during your university days, and the job you're applying to needs programming skills, you're in business. Be aware that you'll likely be interviewed before getting hired, and one question you are odds-on to be asked is "why did you not finish graduate school". I would recommend preparing a good answer.

There's a lot of advice out there on how to find a job. It's up to you to look for it. Unless you stay in academia forever, you'll end up in a job search eventually. If your university has a career center, absolutely visit them. They're a great resource.


Are single author publications given more weight in math hiring? Suppose candidate A has only published alone, and in an alternate universe candidate B has an identical list of publications, most of which are with coauthors. All else being equal, would a typical hiring committee rate A higher?

I suspect the answer depends highly on the field; I'm especially interested in (pure) math.

All else being equal, solo papers can only be weighted more highly than joint papers in hiring decisions.  This is probably especially true at the very top: e.g. a joint Inventiones or Annals paper makes your application look fantastic.  A solo publication in either of these journals is a golden ticket for many academic jobs.

Things get much more complicated when one tries to determine how much more to weight solo papers than joint papers.  To the best of my knowledge few departments or universities have hard-and-fast rules or even written guidelines about this, so much of this evaluation goes on in the minds of the individual evaluators.  The truth is that in some situations jointly authored papers will count to exactly the same degree as solo authored papers, and in other situations the existence of coauthors will cause the work to be substantially discounted.

There is a dramatically increasing prevalence of joint papers in the mathematical profession.  Thirty years ago they were quite rare; and they are even more common now than at the beginning of my career, which was not much more than ten years ago.  There are now, for instance, certain conferences and workshops in which several people sign up in advance to work on a certain problem under the guidance of a senior mathematician.  And then everyone who came to the workshop gets their name put on the paper, even if everything they did was under the guidance of someone else.  This is a model much closer to that of the laboratory sciences than what used to be common in mathematics.  In my opinion, it is time for the profession as a whole and various groups within the profession to put down in writing some feelings about the merits of joint papers.  Of course this will be hard to do since the matter is so complicated: it matters whether your coauthors are "senior" or "junior" to you, it matters whether they have supervised you, it matters what percentage of your papers are joint and whether your papers are always joint with the same coauthors....

Sometimes I see certain publications listed on young people's CV's and think "I find it unlikely that they had a significant intellectual contribution to that work."  That's a problem both ways: i.e., people may be wrongly evaluating the merits of this type of work in either direction!


Quitting a PhD program and starting another one: who is the legal owner of my research? I am at the late stage of a PhD program. For some personal reasons, I have decided to quit this program and apply for a new PhD program in a different country.

I have presented one part of my research in an international conference, and I am about to submit it to a journal. Beside this paper, I have prepared 3 other papers but I have not presented them anywhere. I am the sole author of these three un-published works.

Now my question is whether it is possible to bring these researches to the next university and publish them afterwards? I am the legal owner of these researches? copyright-wise I mean.

I would be more than glad if anyone helps me in this tough situation.

PS: I would have no problem for getting recommendation letters.

Within limits, you most definitely can bring the old research with you and publish it. Unregulated digital data stored on a standard computer should be fine, but for example, there may be limitations on moving human subject data (even de-identified data) depending on what the IRB protocol said. If the research involved samples (e.g., chemical compounds) moving these may also be regulated.

You may or may not be able to use this previous work towards your dissertation. You will have to check with your new department.


Can someone who got GPA 3.7 apply for high ranked university with assistanship? I'm undergraduate civil engineering, and I'm planning for master degree.
My GPA is 3.7, and I didn't do GRE yet. However, I have strong research interest and I have some publications.
Do you believe that I can be enrolled in high ranked universities such as MIT, Berkeley, Stanford?

Your GPA is sufficiently high that it will not prevent you from applying or being accepted to pretty well any US university - but once your GPA is above a 3.5 it tends to just be marked as "good enough". A research group that would base a decision solely on a GPA of 3.7 vs 3.9 vs 4.0 would have a disturbingly irrational fetish for GPA that it would be a mark against the research group more than it would be against you!
It appears this sentiment is shared by Dr Mor Harchol-Balter of Carnegie Mellon University, where she writes (my emphasis added):

3.1 Transcript – grades and classes
When applying to a Ph.D. program in CS, you’d like your grades in CS and Math and Engineering classes
to be about 3.5 out of 4.0, as a rough guideline. It does not help
you, in my opinion, to be closer to 4.0 as opposed to 3.5. It’s a much
better idea to spend your time on research than on optimizing your
GPA. At CMU the mean GPA of students admitted is over 3.8 (even though
we don’t use grades as a criterion), however students have also been
admitted with GPAs below 3.3, since research is what matters, not
grades. A GPA of 4.0 alone with no research experience will not get
you into any top CS program. Keep in mind that GPAs are evaluated in
the context of the undergraduate program. A 3.4 GPA from a topranked
CS undergraduate program like CMU counts the same as a 3.8 or 3.9 GPA
from a less well-known CS undergraduate program.

As @Potato notes, this strong preference away from GPA and towards research may only apply to some fields where undergraduates are capable of participating in research. This may also not be true of Universities without such a very strong focus on performing research. In short: YMMV.
At the graduate level there are multiple factors considered, discussed in various and tremendous depth throughout other topics on this site (and highly recommended to be searched through!). But with that said, your GPA is more than high enough that you may now safely worry about all the other criteria that will be considered: reference letters, statement of purpose, any existing relationships directly or indirectly with professors at the institution, experience in research (or that shows potential for research), GRE score being "high enough" (just like your GPA!), TOEFL for international applicants (again, "good enough") etc.


Will an online minority student PhD recruitment platform be valuable in the US? I know many faculty are concerned about diversity in their labs and it seems to be an ongoing issue. Will it ease PhD recruitment pains to have a searchable database of propsective applicants? Especially for minority applIcants. Not so much to manage the application process but just to find good fit and increase diversity in the group/lab.
My advisor prides herself in building a diverse lab and went through a significant amount of effort to find right persons in the direct applicant pool that fit her criteria.
Anyone have any experience with efforts to diversify their labs that proved successful? Will a secure searchable repository of minority applicants make it easier?

Having reviewed literally thousands of posts asking " I study X. This is my GPA, GRE and TOEFL scores. I have published a few papers. I have good recommendation letters. What is my chance getting into US PhD programs?" type of questions on this site, I would say such a central online platform is definitely useful.

In particular, I think it would be very helpful for the students to get an idea what the schools are looking for. Publishing lab openings is a good start. Some schools may be reluctant to publish their requirements in the first place. But, if many schools are doing that, many others will follow suits.

However, I am not too sure if those admission committee members will spend so much time to go through hundreds of thousands (or even more) applicants' files.
My other concerns is the information security. There would be a lot sensitive data to be looked at. So, I think to put students' data on that site may not be a good idea at the moment.


Is Facebook a necessary tool for a student? I'm starting a master's degree in the autumn, and I recently received an email from the university inviting me to join the Facebook page for the course.

However, I don't currently have an active Facebook account -- I deleted my account several years ago due to concerns about privacy as well as its overall usefulness.  (Mostly a case of "so why am I spending time on this site?")

Is there any explicit advantage I would get by joining the course's Facebook page, or equivalently, is there any disadvantage of not joining?

EDIT: I understand there is not likely to be an explicit requirement to join the group as official communication will be via email and university websites.  I'm asking more from the point of view of networking, socializing, etc.  Would the lack of Facebook be a handicap?

EDIT: Clarification: By "course" I mean the UK definition: The course is the entire year-long degree program.  In this instance, the department has created a Facebook page for everybody who is doing the same degree program starting this year, and that's what they invited me to.  However, my question applies to other possible applications of Facebook as well.

Is there any explicit advantage I would get by joining the course's Facebook page

If you want to interact with your classmates on Facebook before starting the course, then joining the page would enable this.

  or equivalently, is there any disadvantage of not joining?

If you don't feel a need to do the above, then no. There is no reason to expect this to be any kind of handicap. You will have plenty of chances to interact with your classmates face to face, when the course starts.

Facebook is a useful marketing tool for universities, which is why they invited you to join the page. If you personally don't want to interact with others on Facebook (for very understandable reasons), then there is no need to join the page.


Will a journal reject a paper for citing an Encyclopedia? When writing a paper, when I identify some area I'm uncertain of, I try to track down a good source in JSTOR, the library, etc. I am in a situation where I found there is no academic source available on the subject. Scholars studying the topic within the confines of a specific territory, I could find none presenting the information globally.
To be really specific about the case, I need info on the territories a European nation acquired globally, changes to that territory over time. All sources I uncovered were territory-specific, and it would seem silly to cite 10 separate books for this general information.
So that leaves me citing the Encyclopedia in about 10 places in the article, which I normally stay away from except for building background knowledge. Is that something that will be a problem to publishers if I have citations to something like Encyclopedia Britannica?

No
If other secondary sources like review articles are acceptable, then an encyclopedia is acceptable.
If the information is a well-documented, undisputed territorial boundary, then secondary sources should be adequate.
Personally, I have never heard of a paper being rejected for citing the wrong type of source in my field of research.  If the source is wrong or irrelevant, that could be a problem, but type of source does not matter.  In physics, non-peer reviewed sources like ArXiv can be cited, and these are less reliable than encyclopedias.


Is there a non-scientific related activity for students in a conference? The research group that I am associated with organizes a conference that will take place next month.

One of the students asked if there is something that he can volunteer and help in the organization of the conference. He has not any scientific work to present, but rather offers some logistic and technical help.

Can you think of any "volunteering position" and tasks that can be given to a young student? Is this of any benefit to him, or is that just a timeloss?

The aftermath:

I just add here some notes about my feelings once the conference took place.

It is a great opportunity to even be remotely associated to such an environment. In such an environment exists the chance to meet people from the academy and the industry. If you have the rights networking skills you (as a student) can score some internship a possible future employment positions both in academia and industry. So in no way this opportunity is not considered a waste of time.

If you are a student volunteer these are some useful stuff one may need:

Typical Conference Questions and other stuff to consider:

Where is the toilet?
What is the WiFi pass?
Have different adapters and converters in hand

port – to- port video adapters
country – to – country power supply adapters

Extra batteries for the presenter
Arrange poster guys based on their order of presentation, put all the posters in a pdf file, on the same laptop (yours or someone else)
Ask demo presenters if they need monitor for their demos
Before the beginnings of the session, strongly recommend speakers to try if their laptop fit with the cables used for connection to the projector


In Politecnico di Milano, Does the university wait until the end of the deadline to review all the documents? I am preparing for applying for a Ph.D. program at the Politecnico di Milano in Italy. I am working on the initial proposal. The 36th call starts on April 26, 2020, through May 29, 2020. I don't know whether the university waits until the deadline to receive all the application forms and then review the documents or they start to review as they receive applications and when they reach their capacity before the deadline, for instance, mid-May, and then they quit the review and ignore the other upcoming documents from the students?

Yes, in Italy all the applications, for whatever position (PhD student, postdoc, professor) and regardless of the university, are reviewed after the deadline.

No, none of the applications that arrive on time can be ignored.


Do professors change their impression of a previously bad student? One of my friends (a math graduate student from my department) didn't work hard during his undergraduate studies, and his GPA was, naturally, low. He barely (and with some luck) got into grad school, where he works harder.

The problem is that as it seems, most of the professors have a very bad impression of him, both because some of them had him in their classes, and because our department is relatively small and professors exchange a lot of information and opinions about students.

Part of the problem is that his reputation is not (just) of someone who is not hard-working (that would have been easier to fix, perhaps), but at least some of the professors simply don't consider him as smart or talented enough, and that is based solely on courses he participated in -- neither of those professors had any actual mathematical interaction or deep conversation with him, except for his advisor (who knows he wasn't serious enough about his studies) and perhaps a few others, who seem to have a somewhat better opinion of him than most.

Is there a way for this student to change the impression people have of him? From your experience, do people really change their impression of someone, once new information is presented (or are they likely to still think of him as not smart enough to be a mathematician, but who manages to go through grad school with hard work)?

This question might be related, How to change the idea that supervsiors got about you? however I find the situation different: First of all, an advisor has a lot of interaction with the student, so he is likely to notice a change. Also, in the case of my friend, the advisor does believe in his potential, but probably doesn't share his thoughts with people since he's not one of those who talk about students with others, and mostly keeps to himself.

Your friend needs to involve himself in department life. If he is just as invisible as his supervisor, no other professor is going to change their opinion unless they somehow get a new impression (or forget who he was).

One of the best things your friend could do is to give a department seminar if he has some interesting results to present. Make sure that it is well written and rehearsed! He should also chat with professors during social occasions, turn up at department talks and ask interesting questions; things like that.


Compound used in publication There is a paper in which the authors find a compound that is antimicrobial. I would like to experiment with it (I haven't yet asked the authors for it), but I'm anticipating the worst, that is that they will refuse. What can be done there? Are they obligated to provide the compound besides requesting being paid for postage and other expenses?

The academic standards require that the paper explains how the compound was obtained, so that the results can be reproduced by others. So, either:

The product is commercial, and the paper should say how it was obtained? if it's not stated, you can ask the authors for the provider and reference.
They extracted the product from a natural source, and then the authors will describe the extraction procedure.
They synthesized it, and thus they report the details of the procedure, as well as the reagents used (and providers). You can buy the reagents, and reproduce the synthesis.


Is it normal that the PhD research proposal of a candidate be completely written by his/her supervisor without them being involved? I am enrolled in a doctoral school in which we have to submit a research proposal by the first year and it has to be accepted by a board. My advisor gave me the complete proposal and told me to submit it. However, on the website of the university it says that I should develop it with the collaboration of my advisor. I was wondering if it is normal that I am not involved in writing it? (The research topic was already clear in the position advertisement, i.e. the proposal was almost a copy of the ad description and it got accepted.)

(I study in Europe.)

This is a regional practice more than a field-specific practice in my experience. It seemed to me that countries like France that are very strict on the 3-year limit for PhD students tend to have the advisor work out the research topic in advance so as not to waste valuable research time, whereas in countries like the US or Germany, where there are only practical/financial limits on the time you are allowed to be a PhD student, the advisor will more often let the candidate look around a bit at the beginning and formulate the topic themselves.

Another aspect is grant money: if your position is part of a specific project (especially if funded on one of the big EU grants), you are bound to work on a specific question anyway, so there is not really a point in letting you paraphrase a topic that was already fixed well in advance of looking for a candidate.


Can you get a Mathematics PhD if you're an engineer? I'm a Software Engineering and Mathematics student. And I'll probably get my engineering degree much sooner than my Maths degree (I'm not sure I'll get it, but I'll try, as Eng. takes a lot of time off my day).

So, my question is pretty simple: Can an engineer get a Maths doctorate?

For further details, my engineering course has pretty basic maths stuff: Calculus, a bit of logic, introductory number theory, graph theory, some numerical analysis, etc.

However, I'm enrolled in a pure maths course which covers pretty 'advanced' stuff, will it matter that I passed these subjects even if I don't get my math degree?

E: Please consider reopening this question, I've added details that may be relevant to this particular scenario.

The title of your degree does not matter as much as the courses you have taken. If you have taken several upper-level courses, have convincing letters from mathematics faculty, and demonstrate your interest in mathematics in general, you have every chance of getting into a doctoral program in mathematics.

However, if you finish undergrad with only the minimum of math courses required for your engineering degree, and then apply for a math doctoral program, admissions committees will not look fondly on that. Then you might have to supplement your math background in some other way.

This also applies to people with math degrees that are not particularly deep. In the end it's the experience you have had with mathematics that counts, not the particular title of your major/degree.


What should I do when a paper is published similar to my PhD thesis without citation? As part of my PhD thesis I extended an existing method to a new problem. I finished my PhD thesis about 5 years ago and graduated afterwards. After graduation I started working in industry. I never published my thesis (or parts thereof) as a paper, since I was mainly focused on working at the beginning and after several years just was not motivated enough, since I was not pursuing an academic career.

Using a simple google search about the topic you would be able to find my PhD thesis even though the content cannot be accessed online, but surely could be accessed by contacting my previous school or the library.

I recently found a published paper that pretty much does the same things that I did for my thesis. It makes the same modifications to the existing method and comes to the same conclusions. My thesis is however not mentioned or cited in the paper. I am not implying any sort of plagiarism. Once you think about the problem, those modifications are very natural. It's just that I came up with them earlier.

As said above, I was never really interested in publishing my thesis, but now that I saw the paper I was thinking: Hey, I was the first! They should have at least cited my thesis!

I am now wondering, what my options would be and came up with the following two possibilities:

Well, tough luck! I never published my results and so it just seems fair that somebody else did (assuming that they came up with them independently).
Write the editor of the journal and inform them that the main message from the paper was already covered in my thesis and thus is not novel research.

So I was wondering, whether number 1 above applies or whether I should go with number 2. Or what would be other possibilities?

Well, if you did not publish, and your thesis is not available, you really can't complain that somebody else's similar independently performed work is not novel - they had no reasonable way of knowing about your work.

Really, the only way to approach it is the first way. And learn that undocumented work buried in a drawer somewhere does not exist as far as the rest of humanity is concerned. Going forward, document and publish (as appropriate) your work (document for internal business use, publish for the outside world).


Is it ok to use "and/or" in my dissertation? I'm elaborating a small scorecard for a comparison between two technologies, I was wondering if it would be formally acceptable to use "and/or" in my bullet points, e.g., "Not automated and/or involves excessive configuration."

The construction "and/or" generally betrays a weak sentence construction. It's almost always possible to replace the use of "and/or" with a more satisfactory construction (such as "either . . . or" or "at least one of").

So while you are allowed to use it (unless your style manual tells you otherwise!), I think it's always better to avoid it in such writing. (One sign that it has not really gained widespread acceptance is the fact that most style manuals still tell you to eliminate "and/or" constructions entirely.)


Which are the best journals for letters in mathematics (bordering with mathematical physics)? Although in mathematics the letters, i.e., really short articles, just a few pages long, are perhaps less common than in the other fields (see e.g. the comments by Pete L. Clark under his answer to this question), sometimes such a letter really is the best way to communicate the result. It is also quite clear that for this very reason (that the letters are quite uncommon), such letters are not likely, save for some very exceptional situations, to be a good fit for the top pure math journals like the Annals, Inventiones, JAMS, etc.

Apparently in earlier times the best place for publishing letters in mathematics was the French journal Comptes Rendus. This journal still exists but I am not quite sure whether it is the place for letters in mathematics anymore.

Another option that comes to mind could perhaps be the math section of the PNAS but again I am not quite sure how this journal is actually standing with the pure math community, especially outside the US.

There should certainly be other worthy alternatives, so I look forward to the answers pointing them out as well as discussing the journals mentioned above.

QUESTION: What are the best (in terms of standing in the math community and being widely read by mathematicians) journals, or perhaps sections of mathematical or even multidisciplinary journals, for letters in mathematics nowadays?

P.S. I am specifically interested in the journals which would tolerate the papers which are on the border of mathematics and mathematical physics (just to clarify, this refers to the subject matter rather than, say, lacking in rigor). The Letters in Mathematical Physics and Nonlinearity appear to be a bit too niche, I would prefer more broad-scope alternatives.

As Pete L. Clark, I do not quite know what a letter is: short papers are usually quite similar to regular paper, only shorter and usually called notes.

Concerning the venue suitable for short articles, there are quite a few. First, you should now that most journal could accept short papers, but certainly you have more chance to get accepted in a journal specifically targeted toward short paper (except if you solve a known problem or reprove a notoriously difficult theorem, in which case no reviewer can use the length of the paper to argue it does not have much merit). Let me give my impressions on the journal that come to mind (to remind that this is from a biased perspective, I will often refer to the French mathematical community), limiting to journals that to not claim being restricted to a subfield -so called generalist journals.

CRAS (Comptes-Rendus de l'Académie des Sciences, Paris): this journal publishes both research announcements and complete short papers. The announcement part is less and less relevant, but I do not know whether it is less present now. Sadly, while CRAS published top-notch papers, it cannot afford to be very selective anymore. It also suffers from the research announcement role: French hiring committees often blankly dismiss CRAS papers, partially because they may be only announcements.
PNAS (Proceedings of the National Academy of Science, USA): this journal is not very well-known from French mathematicians, but publishes some quite good papers. I think it has a particular taste, but I cannot find the word to describe it. Beware that even if it has a page limit, the format is very dense so articles are not necessarily that short overall.
PAMS (Proceedings of the American Mathematical society): this journal is explicitly for short papers, but the page limit recently moved from 10 to 15 (AMS format). As far as I can judge it is selective, and sometimes publishes excellent papers. It is reasonably well regarded, benefiting from the sisterhood of Transactions AMS.
Bul. LMS (Bulletin of the London Mathematical society): this journal is the LMS counterpart to PAMS, and is somewhat similar (although a little less known and considered, maybe). Since the LMS series has three journals (Bulletin, Journal and Proceedings in increasing order of paper size) instead of two for the AMS, I guess that the average Bulletin paper is somewhat shorter than the average PAMS paper, but the different format makes it difficult to judge.
AMM (American Mathematical Monthly): this journal is well-known and extremely selective. It publishes papers of general interest, of varying length. The notes are typically a few pages long. It is even possible to publish mathematical facts of a few lines, in a grayed box. Since it is considered somewhat recreational, publishing in the Monthly gives less weight to a CV than its harsh selectivity would do for any other journal.
Elemente Math. (Elemente der Mathematik): this is a Swiss cousin to AMM, much less known and much less selective.
MRL (Mathematical Research Letters): this does barely belong to the category of note-publishing journals: it does not usually published paper more than 30 pages, but the average paper there is not a note as far as I can judge.


On value of survey papers It's known that high quality survey papers will direct the community attention towards the author(s). Knowing that, I faced with an important questions on writing such articles. Can such papers be considered as counter-measures for the authors? Specifically, for a graduated student who want to apply for a PhD program, having several survey and literature review papers is a good sign of being a professional researcher in the field (of interest) or it won't be considered a major prominence for him.

I think such a situation can be regarded as a distinguishing criteria for a pre-PhD student because he could conduct such deep study in a specific field.

Am I right?

It would depend, of course, on your aims and purposes. Academia generally rewards specialization over generalization. Doctoral Research, in particular takes you deep into the weeds of a normally quite narrow topic.

Survey papers, on the other hand, are evidence of generalization, though within a single field, usually. They demonstrate breadth, not depth. (See note at end)

Educators (as opposed to researchers) on the other hand value breadth, quite a lot. Most academic positions combine teaching and research, of course.

If you are wanting to apply to a PhD program, or for a research position, I think your deep and narrow papers will serve you well. If you are wanting to apply for a teaching (primarily) position, then breadth will be an asset.

In industry, on the other hand, the evaluations will be quite different. If you are hired to solve a particular problem, then the evaluation will be biased, at least a bit, on how quickly you can be productive (i.e. narrow and deep). But for a management position at the same firm, a wider and more comprehensive view is usually valued.

My advice to students is to study a lot of things broadly and a few things deeply. This seems (to me) to be a good balance.

I think, however, you are asking the question as a person who wants to enter a doctoral program. Unless you already find one tailored to your narrow interest, you will be well served if you are seen as someone who can relatively quickly move into a variety of research areas. It gives you a better choice of advisors than if you have already narrowed your interest.

Note that I interpret "survey" to mean a fairly wide net. It is also possible to "survey" a very narrow spectrum. In some sense the list of references in a dissertation form a survey of a narrow field. If that narrow view is what you actually intend, my answer might be quite different.


How to add an accepted but not published paper to my CV? My first paper has been accepted to a CS conference, it went through a double blind peer-reviewed process. Soon it will appear in conference proceedings from Springer.
How to add it to my CV? Also, should I make an arxiv print available ?

Use the following entry in your publication list (with the correct titles etcetera swapped in, or course):
A. Mitoz: The essence of mathematics lies in an Painlevé property group. In: Proceedings of the International Conference of Computer Science 2021, to appear.


Should I explain how I identified a relevant supervisor in my SOP? I spent time reading a professor's papers, and I developed an idea about how to expand the professor's work. I told the professor this and got the professor's approval. Now the next job is to persuade the admission committee (adcom).
Should I tell the adcom about how I found the professor while writing my SOP (statement of purpose)? I don't see a problem with it. I would be happy if a stranger told me how they found me. So I wrote about it the first time I contacted the professor. However, the adcom is not the professor, and I'm not sure if they care or not. I think that they only care about the benefit that I will bring to the department, as well as the approval of the professor. How I reach them is not important.
But I don't have any reason to remove that part, right? At best, it will show how hard I worked to reach them. At worst, there will be nothing to lose.
My draft is as follows:

I have read some of the most recent and commonly cited papers of Professor X, starting with Paper 1 written in 2014. Among the introduced methods, I found the Method the most interesting prompting further study. I then focused on Paper 2, written with Y. Its introduction on Quanta Magazine gave me a great insight into the Method. However, there are known limitations that Prof X is keen to discern. For example, when the system undergoes rapid changes the method breaks down, the reason for this remains unclear.
My hypothesis is that the changing of the system might suggest that... (this paragraph is for showing my idea to expand the work)

A minor question: should I include this in the email to professors too? Why or why not?

I don't know if adding this information is a good idea, but I think your current text is not.
In the draft, as it stands, you are just pointing out highlights, that proofs that you have skimmed through two papers. You are not showing any hard work because you don't even need to understand the papers to say that the method is interesting and to quote limitations they themselves described. I am not saying you haven't worked hard, or that you don't understand the paper, but just that it doesn't show all that. So, it risks backfiring at you because it sounds sort of pretentious.

If you want to show deep understanding, you would need to "cook" some new knowledge, like relating several papers, or relating their work to other people's. Mind that it will be read by people not familiar with the paper, and they may not know what is your own work, and what is just regurgitating.

One tip I can give you is to try to give it a focus from some other field you are an expert in. For example, sketch out how you would like to introduce a different mathematical modelling technique (like, instead of solving a single differential equation, you model your system as a network of interacting differential equations, where the topology comes from blablabla). This will give them a reason to hire you specifically: you are not just another mini Prof. X, but someone that would be bringing in new knowledge to the group.

Just make sure you run this through your local expert, to make sure you aren't saying anything silly, or that has actually been done before.

If after doing this you believe you are adding new useful information that would make you look better in the face of the admission committee, include it; otherwise, don't.