Is it advisable to follow up journal editor for knowing the status of the manuscript submitted? I submitted a manuscript to one of a popular Indian civil engineering journal 6 months back. They haven't given any comments yet. Is it advisable to follow up them via. mail.?

yes. you can. but do not over do it. and pls note the editor is not bound to reply. he may do so courteously. but instead of 1 month blank, find the average time cycle for that journal (every journal has different response times) and wait twice or thrice the same. some journals have query/ redressal links; pls use them before email. use email as last resort


I need resources regarding the history & meaning of a PhD I am taking over the position of program director for a relatively new PhD program, at a college which has only one PhD program (mine).

The students are generally mid-career public health types, all are post-masters.

I'd like to expose them to something about the "meaning' of the PhD, its history, roots, something like that.... I remember in my program we got a lecture about the monks in medieval times, protecting knowledge and books, something like that. It had quite an impact on me at the time (long ago now).

Does anyone have any ideas about a resource, perhaps readings or other media, that I could assign to them which might instill this same value?

You can see, breif history of PhD and a series of paper in Nature, Nature 1, Nature 2, and Nature 3.

Also, this paper is helpful, Changing PhD.


Can I use an exact sentence from reviewer in the later submission? I submitted a paper and received reviewers' comments on it. Would using an exact sentence (just a single sentence) that one reviewer used in his/her comments be considered plagiarism? The sentence is so beautiful put that I can't say it any better.
The comment is:

The problem is X. Maybe you can try Y.

I did Y, and to motivate why I did Y in the text, I added a paragraph, and I want to use "The problem is X" in that paragraph. I'm afraid that I would alter the meaning by changing the wording.

Reviewers know very well that their suggestions and comments may end up in the final publication. This is the point of reviewing, and no reviewer would (or should) consider it plagiarism if sentences are copied verbatim. Having said that, it is always best to err on the side of caution, so the best course of action would be to let the editor know exactly what you did. You will contact the editor anyway with the revisions, and it is only natural to state that you used the reviewer's quote.
If you want, you can acknowledge the "anonymous reviewer" or ask the editor, and thereby indirectly the reviewer, whether they wish to be acknowledged by name (they will probably decline, but they would be happy at being offered the choice).
Personally, I once was acknowledged as "anonymous reviewer" for a model proposed based on the data in the paper (they used an entire figure I sent them). I fully expected the authors to use my image and model (why else would I have sent it?), but the acknowledgement came as a surprise and made me happy.


How can I select really nice project ideas for undergrad research projects? I wanna do a challenging project at the end of each course I take in college and am interested in bigger projects with wider scope as well. But I'm unable to come up with good ideas. Where can I find research papers or sites to help me, given my limited knowledge as an undergraduate? I study Electronics & Communication Engg. while I also take courses from CompSci.

If you want to do projects related to your courses, I wouldn't push towards recent literature.  It will be specialized and the emphasis will be on new ideas, not on implementation of your course learnings.

Instead I would look at the references in your texts (often older/harder books).  They may have harder exercises or have small design projects.

Also, of course, talk to your teachers.


My Google Scholar profile is public but it does not appear in Google's search result. How can I fix this problem? My Google Scholar profile is public but it does not appear in Google's search result. How can I fix this problem?
Here is the link to my Google Scholar profile:
https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=U81fBHYAAAAJ&hl=en&oi=ao

Read about the page rank algorithm of Google.
The same problem was happening to me. Then I linked my google scholar's page to my homepage (institute one). Now it appears at the top in the google search results.


Can a supervisor extend the paper and change the order of authors? Background: In my area, people extend their conference paper to a journal version by adding only 30% contribution. This means that you get a second paper, with the same content (introduction, related works, motivation, etc). Secondly, the order of authors matter in my area.

Story: I published a conference paper, which is one of major contributions to my PhD, and I planned to prepare an extension of that paper to be submitted to a journal. However, I postpone the extension, as I was busy with my other projects (also related to my PhD). Recently, my supervisor has secretly given the (almost) extended paper to another person to do the extension and has submitted it with a different order of names.

My supervisor and the person who extended the paper did not tell me anything about it and kept everything secret, until the last minute of submission. Although my supervisor knew that I had planned to do the extension, he ignored all my previous efforts. He even sent my already extended version to this person. However, I should acknowledge that both of them had minor contributions to the initial paper, but I am not sure if that gives them the right to extend it.

The question is whether my supervisor had the right to do so? He knew that I have planned to do the extension (as I had already extended some parts of it --I added 4-5 pages of a proof of a theorem and extended experiments).

If the paper was submitted without your knowledge and agreement, this is a serious problem. All co-authors are supposed to know about and approve a paper that they are listed on before it is submitted.  This would be an ethical breach by your supervisor.  I would at least raise it as a concern with them.  This is something that you could potentially raise with others, as well, such as someone else at your instutation, or even the journal.  Consider the consequences before you do anything, though: it's likely to have a major impact on your relationship with your supervisor, and therefore your PhD studies.

Beyond that, the situation is much more of a gray area.  Clearly the way things were handled, particularly the lack of communication with you, was not optimal.  But it's not so clear that it was "wrong" beyond that.

The PI directs the research of the group and has the authority to decide that someone else will now take the lead on a collaborative project.
It is a judgment call who should be first author.  If the other researcher made a significant contribution and put together the draft of this paper, they may have a legitimate case to be first author.  At least, it may be ambiguous enough that it would be hard to challenge.  Also, someone might feel that the first author on this paper should be the one who did the most on the revision/extension rather than the one who did the most overall.  After all, you already got first author recognition for the primary piece of work on the conference paper.  In a series of related papers that build on each other, who did the most recent work may be considered most relevant to authorship position.

Don't be too quick to assume intent. Your talk of the supervisor keeping things "secret" implies intent to sneakily do this behind your back.  I wouldn't necessarily assume that.

Perhaps your advisor is just poor at communication/management, and this was an oversight.  This is quite common; many professors are not good at managing a group of people.  Even submitting the paper without your knowledge may be an oversight (it shouldn't happen, but it does happen).

The advisor might even think they are doing you a favor by taking some work off your shoulders and getting something done that has been delayed.

Talk to them and make them aware of your concerns and see if you can arrive at a constructive solution.  It may be too late to undo what is happening here, but hopefully you can agree on a better way of working in the future.

If, after attempting to discuss this, you feel that your supervisor is acting in bad faith, you may want to escalate the situation.  But only do this as a last resort.


Can I reuse part of a paper for my thesis? I am finishing writing my master's thesis (~100 pages) and I also just submitted a paper (8 pages) to a conference. Since both are on the same subject and I am an author on both, is it ok if I reuse one page from the paper and put it in my thesis without many changes? The paper will not be published until 2013 (if at all). Is it necessary to cite it in any way?

Yes. It is certainly okay. Indeed, general practice when writing a PhD thesis is to produce a number of publications that add up to the thesis, whether directly (using staples) or by a good deal of massage. Some published material may be omitted and some additional material may be included. There's no reason why this shouldn't apply to a Master's thesis, too.

It is a good idea to cite the paper in the thesis (if the paper has been accepted for publication) and the thesis in the paper, if possible.


How many class room hours does the typical university teacher teach per week? I am wondering, for full time university teachers (not those who also have research responsibilities), what is generally the number of hours per week that they teach? I currently teach 20 hours per week and find the load quite heavy giving me little time to prep new modules with quality. Adding to that the responsibility of marking and it is not uncommon that I end up working more like 50-60 hours per week to teach 20.

Are these numbers average? High? Low?

There is no “typical” number in this matter. Let's take a few examples:

UK, lecturer: it's usually a full-time position, so you have to put in 35-40 hours per week. The ratio of lecture time over all the rest (preparation, departmental committees, etc.) depends on the contract, but I have rarely seen it pushed past 1:1 (which means roughly 20 hours of teaching, maybe 25 at most).
France, "PRAG": this is the position of a high-School teacher detached to a university, and the closest one to a lecturer position. Their nominal teaching load is 384 hours per year, with a weight of 1.5 for lectures and 1 for exercises sessions. But for one the year is very short, from about 23 to 26 weeks, so that means about 15 hours per week, and this is only the nominal amount. In any cases, they (voluntarily or not) have to teach additional hours, which are paid in addition (to a lower rate than nominal hours).
As a point of comparison: a French high-school teacher would have 18 teaching hours per week.

Other comparison points, less relevant to the question as they are for teaching+research positions:

France, associate professor (maître de conférences): junior-level position, supposed to be half teaching and half research. This has a fixed number of 192 teaching hours per year. If you consider that those are spread on 30 weeks, it gives 6.4 hours per week. Even considering it is not a teaching-only position, that number is lower than the one you quote.
France, full professor (professeur des universités): same number of hours in theory, but as you gain seniority you can do more full-class teaching (with bigger groups), of which every hour counts as 1.5 hour in your yearly total. Through this, and other mechanisms, senior professors usually have fewer hours to teach.


List of open problems: pros and cons of making it public I am currently a 4th-year PhD student in Theoretical Computer Science, expected to graduate next year.
Since I end up finding more questions I'd be interested in solving that time or brainpower to actually solve them all, I am maintaining and keeping for myself a list of research problems I'd like to solve at some point, or see solved.
I have mentioned a few of these questions to friends or during open problem sessions in workshops, and currently this list is hidden somewhere on my academic website for ease of access.
Some of these problems, I really would like to see them solved, and I fear that I may not have the right set of tools or sufficient insight/intellect to achieve it by myself.
Ideally, I'd love to see someone get interested in them, and possibly start a collaboration leading to a solution. But I'd hate to see these questions get buried and forgotten, fading into oblivion without ever being addressed — just because I kept them to myself.
What are the pros and cons of making this list actually public? I am specifically thinking along the following axes:

Research: while I suppose advertising problems I deem interesting can only be good for the field I am in, is there any downside?

Short-term interests: I like these problems, and I do believe at least some of them are good ones. I'd be rather sad if some other people methodically solved all of them without me, although it's a bit selfish of me. Especially if I do spend some time on some of them before my graduation -- I only have that much time left to get new results and consolidate job applications for postdocs.

Long-term interests: Sooner or later I'd like to have a position in academia, and who knows even advise students. As far as I can tell, being able to suggest research ideas taylored to a student's interest is a big part of the job. Should I try and keep as many as these questions as possible in case I may need them sometime for this purpose?

Point to keep in mind:

Asking questions is easy.  Asking questions other people think is interesting is less easy (see some questions on this site).  Asking questions that lead to important results is hard.

Fundamental ideas come up over and over again, so even if they don't take off at first, they'll spread eventually.

Pros:

If some of the questions are indeed interesting, you could help people find good problems.  If you're lucky, you may get asked to collaborate, but I wouldn't count on it.

Such a list, may help get your name out there.  Maybe the questions are great and people think you're brilliant.

Cons:

The most obvious and serious con for you is that someone else solves what you're working on before you do, and a lot of your work becomes unpublishable, and you don't get a job you want.

Some of your questions are trivial/well known and people think you're stupid/ignorant.

Worst case scenario (exaggerated): everybody in the field finds your questions super-interesting and all work on the same question but nobody solves it for the rest of their life and the field dies.

Suggestions
Think very carefully about which of your ideas you want to share, with whom, and with what purpose.  I'm not going to advertise to the world what new idea I'm working on, or even a good one I have on the back burner, until I make serious progress or have compelling evidence.  Because (1) I don't like to compete with people, and (2) if nothing works out (most common) then it's likely either not a good idea or not the right time for this idea.  This doesn't mean I won't tell people, or ask other people related questions, I just don't post a pdf on the internet.  I tell some people I trust, and sometimes this leads to collaborations.  Occasional "further problems" to projects I've done, I mention in papers, but this is when either I don't want to do it myself or I deem it unlikely anyone else would solve it before me.
Also, at least for me, often it's years between first asking a question and answering it, but if I had advertised it, maybe someone else would've done it in the meantime robbing me of the satisfaction of answering it myself.
If you decide you are willing to share some of your ideas on the internet, and you think they may be of wide interest, rather than just posting a list, consider making a blog of some of your thoughts.  If you get readers, this could generate interest in things you like, which might make your work more popular.  At the same time, you can pose your questions in a very informal way, so they're not presented as if they're supposed to be a grand list of the most fundamental problems in the field.
Not everyone has the same philosophy as me, but I would consider being too open about your ideas somewhat risky at your stage.
Oh, and maybe ask your advisor first.


What does being acknowledged in a medical journal imply? Comments on another question pointed out that many medical journals require "written consent of any cited individual(s) noted in acknowledgments or personal communications".

I find this requirement exceedingly strange.  In my own field (theoretical computer science), acknowledgements and citations of personal communications are just another form of citation.  Just as ideas/results/techniques/data from another publication require citation, ideas/results/techniques/data from another human being require some form of acknowledgement.  Otherwise, in both cases, the author is dishonestly claiming credit for someone else's work.  An acknowledgement gives the person being thanked no more responsibility or credit for the work than a citation to one of their papers.  A citation to "personal communication" is even more clearly equivalent to a paper citation.

Clearly attitudes toward citation and acknowledgement are different in medicine, and possibly in other fields; I'd like to understand why.  Does being acknowledged by a medical paper imply some responsibility toward or endorsement of the content of the paper?  Does acknowledging someone famous increase a medical paper's chances of being accepted or cited?  Why don't the same issues attach to paper citations?

From the Lancet:

  Acknowledgments — written consent of cited individual

From CMJA:

  Authors should specify, in the acknowledgements section, contributions to the paper that should be recognized but do not justify authorship, for example critical review of the study proposal or assistance with statistical analysis. The Canadian Medical Association Journal (CMAJ) requires that these people give their written permission for their names to appear in print.

From Infection Control and Hospital Epidemiology:

  Thank you notes. Persons should not be thanked in the Acknowledgments
  section without their knowledge and consent. Authors will be asked
  during the submission process to confirm they obtained permission from
  all persons thanked by name in the Acknowledgments section.

I suspect some of this is from the very defined notion of what constitutes authorship in medical journals, and the likelihood that someone who had some impact on the reported study would not make the authorship list. For example, the same ICJME that has developed the most widely used authorship standards also has this to say about non-author contributors:

  Because acknowledgment may imply endorsement by acknowledged
  individuals of a study’s data and conclusions, editors are advised to
  require that the corresponding author obtain written permission to be
  acknowledged from all acknowledged individuals.

Basically, the assumption is that, by being acknowledged, there is the possibility that you could be seen as endorsing the findings of the study, and that erring on the side of caution, you should have to obtain permission before acknowledging someone.

This is even true for not medically-specific journals. Consider, for example, this entry from PLoS One:

  Authors are responsible for ensuring that anyone named in the Acknowledgments agrees to be named.


What are the rules of authorship when posting a reply to a discussion? Me and a professor published a paper where he was first author since he did most of the work. Today, we have received a discussion and we would like to reply. I'll be the one in charge of the reply, and I was wondering if I could be first author of the reply. What are your thoughts ?

This sounds like a question best settled by first reviewing how common changing the authorship order is in the relevant journal/field and then having a conversation with your professor. Ultimately, it is up to the two of you to decide.


Good thinker, bad problem solver in graduate school? I was curious, what is academia's perspective on the following type of student, assuming that the student is well qualified via research experience, letters of recommendation, grades, GRE, passion, and other things CV related:

The student is very, very good at asking innovative questions and proposing difficult questions that others have not thought about, that is they can see the current landscape of their field and understand it really well. However, innately, they are not a good problem SOLVER. They can pretty much do a minute portion of problem solving in research, but it's something akin to hinting (ambiguous solutions that need a third party to think hard about implementation). They can solve solve problems as per their curricula (and thus get a high GPA), but not unsolved problems in academia. Moreover, it helps that they are a brilliant communicator and writer.

The reason why I ask is because I have a friend who fits the description above. That friend is heavily, heavily revered by his PI who absolutely loves him. One of the primary reasons is because my friend's questions have been the basis for many grants (which he also writes with the consultation of my professor), resulting in a large influx of funding for my professor. The professor, as a thinker, would be qualitatively put as "above average", and is a hybrid between a thinker and a doer. Everyone else in the lab is a lab technician, and there are a couple of postdocs. What's interesting is that the lab has really good chemistry. My friend comes up with an idea, runs it by the PI. The PI, who has insight checks it off or guns the idea down depending on the context. The PI also proposes solutions. Next, the technicians and postdocs who are highly skilled in procedure and are the tangible hands that make the results happen in real life as per the instructions of the PI. The PI admits that they don't have the innate vision to ask these questions, but given the questions can crank out a solution with the lab technicians. It's a little scary to think that for the past 2 years, an undergraduate has been the mind behind pretty much all of the sub-experiments and directions of my institution's top labs by funding and results. The PI has received tenure as a result. What's interesting is, by speculation, no one can survive without the other. Well, the PI could technically survive, but would be reduced to doing his previous projects. However, without an army of skilled labor and a PI as an intermediary, my friend cannot get anything done. My friend wants to move to a different institution for pedigree as he receives an advanced degree. My friend is an abysmal doer, and cannot learn at an appreciable rate.

By abysmal doer, I mean (by his own admission), sometimes clumsy with the hands, sometimes randomly lacks motivation, and when focused, is "slow" in picking up a step by step procedure. For example, we took an upper level chemistry course together for a science elective. He can easily explain PCR on paper and orally, with much deeper insight and implications than a textbook, so you know he's not memorizing. But come in the lab, he looks totally clueless and out of place, looks at the reagents like they're foreign substances.

Outside of being a theoretician (for example a theoretical physicist, something my friend ironically does not want to pursue), can my friend survive in graduate school?

Be careful. Interesting conjectures, new ideas are a dime a dozen. The hard work of proving (or disproving) conjectures, and working out the implications of new ideas to see if they turn out useful or are just ephemeral fireworks are the real center of any science.

Just go search in e.g. Wikipedia for conjectures, there are many famous ones (and literally hundreds of less well known ones).


Could undergraduate degree be revoked for minor noncompliance in human subjects research? With the understanding that universities define "minor compliance" in various ways, I'm curious about whether an undergraduate degree could/ever would be revoked for the use of interview data gathered prior to receiving formal IRB exemption.

In the particular case I'm interested in, interview subjects were current and former elected officials and other "elites" accustomed to speaking publicly about the questions raised during interviewing but nonetheless granted anonymity. The student didn't initially realize he needed exemption given the subjects' backgrounds, but he ultimately sought it from the IRB. His thesis adviser approved the exemption request and said he could still use the interview data already collected for his thesis, although this was contrary to the IRB's stated policy.

The exemption was only granted after the student submitted the assignment, but the student was still awarded his degree. Could the student face revocation of his degree or other repercussions if something like this resurfaced? My sense is that such an extreme outcome could only apply to PhD students, but I'm curious to hear what others might think.

(Not an IRB expert - but will hazard an answer since I don't think we have many resident IRB experts)

First, it sounds like this is for a class "assignment" and was not published. In this case, it seems unlikely that this would meet the definition of research as it pertains to such things. The IRB apparently agreed, since it issued an exemption request - this does not mean that it approved your procedure; rather, it means that for whatever reason, it agreed that it was not necessary to approve your procedure. Not sure if this is because what you did posed "minimal risk" or because it did not meet the definition of research. If it gave the latter reason, then your professor is correct, and you were fine to use the data.

Second, there is the issue of responsibility - if there had been an ethical lapse involving this, whose fault is it? Normally it would be the principal investigator of the grant that funded the research. Not sure what changes in a classroom situation -- but, I'm guessing it would be the instructor of record. As you are an undergraduate student (and therefore don't have a PhD), I don't see how you could be expected to perform research without supervision. Assuming you were honest and straightforward with your advisor, thus, I think he would be blamed for a failure to supervise, rather than you being blamed for misconduct.

Finally, degree revocations are exceedingly rare, and almost always tied to evidence of serious misconduct (e.g., plagiarism) emerging after the degree was granted. Doing research without IRB approval does count as serious misconduct; however, you personally are not on the hook per the above points. Even if you were, the cognizant authority (i.e., course instructor) was already aware of the issue at the time and dealt with it internally rather than beginning expulsion procedures. So, it would make little sense for him to say "I know I gave a good grade, but I've been rethinking it, and want to revoke the degree." Normally, a new complaint would have to be raised to even open the question of whether a degree should be revoked.

TL;DR: your degree will not be revoked.


Life as a PhD student I completed my Master's in Chemical Engineering recently as an International student in the US and now I wanted to go for a PhD as well in the same field.I completed a few Volunteer research work for a few professors to build up experience and gain vital skills necessary for research.One thing that I noticed was the lack of direction in research. While the PhD students I worked under were great, they would just give me a problem and tell me to solve it without any guidance or direction. I had no prior experience with the research topics in question and I had a really tough time to figure things out and as a result it was quite stressful.

I wanted to ask if this is to be expected in a PhD position as well.

How much guidance you get depends on your advisor. Some give a lot, some give none at all. The latter is not the ideal. Some will give you a problem to work on (or several) and others expect you can come up with your own. The latter is not the ideal.

Part of your experience is due to the fact that PhD students have little experience as yet in advising.

Most advisors, I think and hope, and closer to the ideal, will assist you in coming up with a suitable problem and with help along the way. But they will also expect a lot of initiative on your part.

Becoming a good researcher isn't something you necessarily learn how to do on your first outing. You should get pretty far along on the learning curve while doing a doctorate, but there will still be things to learn and refinements you can make.

But, if you are getting in to the process at the beginning, look for an advisor who suits you and your ability. Some people will actually want no assistance, but most will want at least some guidance throughout. Don't choose an advisor randomly or for the wrong reasons. It is an important first step.


Does an associate professor work in the laboratory on a daily basis? I got a position as an associate professor at new university. I observe my colleagues that they do not work in the lab normally which is quite strange for me. In my previous job as assistant professor I needed to work hard myself in the lab to produce the results, then describe them and publish. Here I am generally ''forced'' to sit in front of computer but without going to the lab and work physically I do not produce any results and no publications... How it looks at your university? Life science field.

In my experience in (neuro)biology this is largely a function of the size of the lab, particularly the number of students.
The tasks of writing papers and enough grant applications to support the lab (along with all the other tasks professors do: on administrative committees, reviewing grants and papers written by others, teaching responsibilities) take up a lot of a professor's research time, at any level.
The larger the lab, the more time moves from "bench time" to "supervising time". This is the delegation of responsibilities problem experienced by managers of all types, and also applies to professors.
It is more common for early-career professors to spend more time on the bench because they will have few students/postdocs and those students will be new students as well. As a lab matures, not only are more of the bench tasks done by students, but there are more senior students and postdocs that are familiar with work in the lab and can begin to mentor others on their bench skills.
I've also seen a lot of senior professors, who may be wary of taking on students as they approach retirement and have less career pressure, migrate back to their labs.
If your lab isn't productive without you in it, then you need to get back to the lab, regardless of how your colleagues' time is allocated. Probably more importantly, if you don't have students and postdocs in your lab that you are supervising, you're missing out on a big chunk of your job which is to train the next generation of scientists.


How to make your paper's materials available online? (personal webpages, Institutional server, etc?) I would like to distribute some of the materials related to my paper (such as source code) available online. I have the option of uploading them to my personal website or to a server in my institution, (or any better ways you suggest?)

I am concerned that if I upload it on the institution personal space, after graduating I won't have access to the server anymore or my page might be closed.
and I don't want to disappoint my readers by providing a link which may expire in a few years.

Personal website seems a good option so I fully have control over the materials.

I would like to know if there is any better option or online services recognized especially for hosting academic materials (here my code) which I can link them in my paper?

Try something like github which will provide not only a public place for storing your code, but also will give you version control.

Other similar sites exist such as GoogleDocs, FlipDrive, DropBox, ...


Is it possible to agree on feasible expectations with my supervisor or should I surrender to her demands? My supervisor told me I’d need 5 papers (preferably all published) in order to get my PhD degree. However , attending a PhD workshop, I was advised to discuss a feasible plan with my supervisor within my allotted time (3 years) . The formal guidelines of my faculty say that there are no number of papers or chapters to get your degree as this depends on the quality of the work done, however my supervisor says there are “informal” guidelines in the department that I should follow, this is having 5 papers for submission. Do you think there is a way I could fight this battle?

She has the right to make a numerical suggestion, since the guideline does not specify any number. The first thing is to determine if this is feasible. Check the thesis and publications of other PhDs coming out from her lab and if this has been the norm, then at least you know that i) it's been done (whether you can or not is another matter) and ii) she is not making an unreasonable request.

The second thing is to determine if you have the drive, time, energy, and determination to churn out five papers with publishable quality in three years in your field. And thus far is it likely to happen if you're 4 months in and she has only been treating you as a RA.

The third is to check if you really like to do this PhD with her. Your questions have a lot of resentments and mistrusts, on top of negative wordings such as "surrender," "fight the battle," etc. Do you really want to work with her? Or are you victimizing yourself a bit too fast too furiously? You'll need to ask yourself that. If you're only 4 months in and already hating her at this extend, I'd frankly suggest think, hard, if you want to stay.

Lastly, whatever the agreement will be, have it clearly stated in writing: How many, in what time duration. And what is considered "a paper." Don't guess her meaning by saying "preferably published". Define the meaning: is it a chapter with publishable quality? Is it a real submission with at least one round of review? Or is it actually published?. Notice that if your work does not pan out and you never have the papers put together you may just end up miserable and PhD-less. Use that as the benchmark and negotiate (not fight a battle.)


co-supervised PhD, dis-similar research For co-supervised PhD in USA, I am wondering if it is possible to have two supervisor in two un-related field. (For instance, telecommunication, and database). These two fields are about 90 degree dispart (just rough estimate). If this possible? If yes, should the thesis include work from both field?

There shouldn't be a problem with this provided that all of the following are true.

Are you working at the intersection of the two fields? Do you intend to add something significant to both fields?
Are the two potential supervisors compatible with each other? This means mostly in non-technical qualities.
Are you comfortable with each of the supervisors and their work separately?
Is the institution ok with it?

If any of the above are false, however, it might be a bad idea. For example, if you are working primarily in telecom but only need some help in the database area it would probably be better to have one supervisor and seek the additional help less formally.

You don't want two supervisors with different ideas about your progress or about what is important or about when you are done.

Caveat: There may be a few more considerations that you should consider but I can't think of.


Accepting a graduate offer of admission and then turning it down I was offered admission into a graduate physics program in February. I was given 21 days  within which to accept the offer and pay the admission deposit.

Now I was sent an email from the program offering me a prestigious university scholarship to motivate me to accept the offer of admission. I had not yet received any other offer of admission, so out of desperation, I accepted the offer of admission and paid the admission deposit.

Now, if I am offered admission into any of the upper grade universities I applied to, I will write to the graduate program director from the former program and politely mention that I cannot enroll in their program because the upper grade university is a better fit for me.

Will this cause a serious problem for me, i.e., in terms of my future academic career and the graduate program director's denial to let me go?

Traditionally, the recommendation is that as soon as you are accepted you withdraw your applications to schools that are out of the running. Then as soon as you accept an offer you withdraw your remaining applications. If a school make a decision early and requires a decision before you hear from schools you may find more desirable, it is best to ask for an extension.

I go against the norm a little and believe that if a school/employer will not give you and extension and wishes to put you at a disadvantage that it is not unreasonable to reneg on your acceptance. As this is not the norm, it will burn bridges.


How to handle requests for a race-based exam structure? A colleague of mine is a non-tenured teaching-track faculty
in a neighboring university.
We work together frequently through our joint outreach and REU projects.
He is currently teaching a summer course in mathematics (pre-calculus algebra) with a compressed schedule from mid May to early July.
The final exam is scheduled in two weeks.
Last week he received students’ requests/suggestions,
cosigned by presidents of two large student organizations¹, that:

The final exam should be cancelled for minority students (but remain the same for the rest of the students, i.e. minority students will do strictly less work); or
The final exam should be modified to contain only questions that relate to life experiences of marginalized minorities; or
Marginalized minorities will take an easier final exam.

None of these requests are realistic at least in the current semester.
Indeed, imposing different grading standard by race is likely illegal too.
So we can start with the premise that
none of the requests can be granted.
Yet, it seems dangerous to dismiss these requests completely, as they are backed by large student organizations.
Moreover, in one discussion, some student estimated that the failure rate in his classes has a strong correlation to race factor in the last few semester.
(Students probably reached this estimation only by
surveying other students who took his classes in the past, but my colleague admits that it: “sounds about right”.)
It sounds to me that the students are collecting data for the next level of action should he reject the requests.
The vague official message from the chair and dean is that he, as the instructor, has the right to design the course.
However, it is seems that the administration is getting ready to let him take the blame, should this develop into a PR disaster – e.g., the chair will only discuss this on the phone but not over email.
He feels that his job is on the line.
How could one react to this and avoid both a PR disaster or doing something illegal?
There may not be enough time to save my colleague, but I’m still curious, as I wouldn’t be surprised if this would happen on my campus soon.

¹ The two presidents are not enrolled in this class, but many club members are enrolled. This letter was only addressed to this one instructor, cc’ed department chair. If they send the same request to other instructors, we wouldn’t know.

I would suggest offering something in response that makes the students feel like their concerns are heard, without compromising the academics of the course.
For example:

I understand that this is a difficult time, especially for minority students. Unfortunately, if I cancel the final exam, I won't be able to assign a grade to these students and they won't get credit for their work this semester. But in recognition of the extra challenges some students are facing right now, I am going to schedule an additional review session and office hours before the final exam. This way, students who are struggling can get additional opportunities to master the material before the exam.

A response that communicates empathy and understanding is much less likely to develop into a PR disaster than one that is irritated, defensive, or dismissive.


During copyediting, journal disagrees about spelling of paper's main topic Let's suppose my paper is about icebergs.  The paper is accepted to a quite well known journal on a broader topic.  The copy editor has changed the word "iceberg" to "ice-berg" everywhere in the paper.  I have requested twice that the hyphen be removed, and the copyeditor has disagreed.

A clear majority of scientists in my field use the spelling "iceberg" but there is a minority which uses "ice-berg" in their published papers.  It is easy to produce several lines of evidence that this is true.

How should I respond to this situation?  My primary concern is that I want my paper to be easy to find.  I do not think people are searching for papers using the term "ice-berg."

Update:  As suggested by the answers below, I tried to contact the editor.  After waiting a while and getting no response, I tried again.  And I waited, and tried a third time.  Subsequently and without explanation, the copy editor made the requested changes.  Overall, I had to check five proofs.  In summary, I was successful but I am not sure why.

Putting style above content and reducing the ability to find the paper does not help anybody. My experience with copy editors is that they make and introduce far more errors and problems than they solve.

Anyway, I would discuss this with the editor that accepted your paper and give him/her the scientific reasons. This might help more than discussing the issue with the copy editor.


Psychology Science degree My brother did a Bachelor of Science degree, Psychology Major, at the University of Manitoba.

I am curious if it is common for Psychology to be offered through Science and Arts faculties as opposed to just Arts. Do most Universities offer this?

In the US, Psychology is rarely considered part of the arts, and is generally called a "social science", with most degrees being offered as "bachelor's of science". Oddly, psychology is often excluded from "STEM" designations, where it is often not considered under the umbrella of either "science" or "technology". For more info on this, see the American Psychological Association's article on Psychology as a Core Science.

Regardless, at least in the US, Psychology is generally not classified as an art. It's a field in kind of a weird place, classification-wise. There often is some flexibility in degree classification here, as many Universities allow you to get a "bachelor or science" (BS) or "bachelor of arts" (BA) in nearly any field (even something like Physics or Math). The BS vs BA classification often is just a question of what other classes you take, such as in language (BA's usually require foreign languages and more classes in humanities). Just in case things aren't quite confusing enough for you.

Psychology's position as "social science" is something in-between the humanities and science-proper, with some areas clearly being heavily related to the arts (such as dance psychology), while some are actually housed within engineering schools (human factors, psychology of engineering, etc). Still other fields - or descendants - of psychology are hosted in schools of technology like computer science (human computer interaction, for instance). So the field of psychology, perhaps more than most fields, tends to defy easy classification and every institution has their own unique interpretations and departmental history.


What is a "residency requirement" in the context of Canadian and US PhD programs? An acquaintance is planning to apply to law schools for a Ph.D in Canada. She is reading about the residency requirement and is sure that it means that she would have to live on-campus, possibly even in an undergraduate dormitory. Here's a sample statement from Dalhousie University:

  Applicants must spend at least one full academic year (12 months) in
  full-time residence at Dalhousie after registration for the PhD
  program. The Graduate Studies Committee of the Schulich School of Law
  reserves the right in certain cases to require the completion of a
  second year of residency. It is to be noted, however, that consistent
  with other doctoral programs at Dalhousie University, PhD candidates
  must pay fees at the full-time rate for two years regardless of
  whether they have been required to spend a second year in residence at
  Dalhousie.

I've told her that I believe it's just a requirement to register as a full-time student and live in the area. Are there any Ph.D programs that do require (or strongly suggest) on-campus living? If that's too close to a shopping question, is a Ph.D residency requirement not a requirement to use on-campus housing?

Note: I know of an intensive Master's program that strongly suggests living in campus housing unless you already live in the university area.

Generally, in the context of a doctoral degree, "residency requirement" refers to some minimum number of credits that must be completed at the degree-granting institution, or minimum duration during which the degree candidate must be enrolled full time at the degree granting institution. In contrast, work completed at another institution and applied toward the degree does not count towards the residency requirement.  See e.g. policy statements here , here, and here, which make it clear that this is the kind of residency requirement they're referring to.

But "residency requirement" is occasionally used in other ways - for example, here it refers to students being considered in-state residents for admissions and tuition purposes.

It is very unusual but not unheard of for doctoral students to be required to live on campus for some time. See this Google search. I am not aware of any US or Canadian universities that have this requirement.


Keeping marking unbiased when work is not submitted anonymously I'm used to a system in which all important exams or pieces of coursework are marked anonymously. (That is, papers are identified by candidate number, not by name, and the examiner does not know which number corresponds to which student, at least until the marks have been submitted.) This has obvious advantages in terms of reducing bias by making sure marks are awarded based only on the quality of the work and not influenced by the name of the student.

I was surprised when I joined my current department to find that no attempt is made to keep work anonymous -- students hand in their final exams with their names at the top and their lecturer marks them.

Are there any advantages to knowing which student's paper you are marking?

In a system where students' names are on their papers, what do people do to prevent bias while marking?

I've worked both ways and I'm unsure which way is best. There are clearly benefits to each way.

You already understand the benefits of 'blind' marking - you are more likely to be unbiased. However, by knowing the student behind the writing there are some benefits (along with the danger of bias).

One benefit is that you can authenticate more easily. That is, if you keep reading papers from one student and you see a sudden jump in quality (up or down) it can alert you to the possibility the work is not theirs (hired writers, etc.). Another benefit is that you can watch the development of each student over time. This is a little more difficult if you do not know while you are marking. Of course, you can go back over the papers after you submit the grades but that requires double reading (and not many want to do that for each student). There is the added benefit of seeing something which jumps out, like a special quote or comment you made in class. You can see who is getting it and who is not while you are marking. This last point is less of an issue because for stand-out cases you are more likely to read twice and it would be less work since it's a one-off event.

For exams, there is less of a benefit to the authenticity point above (since they were in the exam room) but it does still allow you to keep an eye on students. There is the obvious administrative benefit of not having to anonymize the exams.

As for preventing bias when papers are not anonymous, I consider each mark quite carefully and ask myself if I am being biased. When I look over all the marks and I see that I passed students I cannot stand and that I failed students I really like, then I feel fairly confident that I am keeping my bias in check.


Who Owns the Code I Write (Graduate Student)? As a graduate student in a CS program, "Who Owns the (rights to the) Code I Write"?

I know that the answer is different depending upon:

(Case-1) I work for the University or am supported in some way (such as a TA, RA, and whether I receive financial assistance such as tuition).

(Case-2) Or I work for an employer who is paying my tuition (and thus may have some claim over the code I write while working on courses).

(Case-3) My specific case - I am paying for my tuition, so there is no party providing funds. Thus it would seem that I retain ownership in the code I write on my own time. Does it matter whether the code is written to solve a problem or assignment?

I have read my University Intellectual Property statement, (which is written in legal terminology), but seems to suggest that I would relinquish (at least some) rights in the first case. This would indicate that I would retain rights in my case (or the employer policies in Case-2).

There are similar questions (below), but they seem to answer different questions, related to (Case-1) and relationship between student, professor, and funding parties.

Ownership of the code
Sharing assignments with a potential employer
Thesis in use, potential employer wants to see source code

As indicated, this is a legal question and  not an academic one, however I do get asked this frequently by students.

Intellectual property questions are never simple. When you do work at a university, the idea that created the work may have come from a member of the academic staff. Ideas and techniques that are incorporated in the work come from classes created by other academic staff. Some of their ideas come from their education and books and papers they used. The university (their current employer) and perhaps some past employers may have contributed to that knowledge.

Then the student creates some artefact from that. Does the student wholly own everything intellectual in that artefact? Probably not, unless there is an agreement that says they do.

Without any agreement it would be for the courts to decide who owns what fraction of the intellectual property. Normally no one bothers, but when it is a valuable idea or artefact then the lawyers will follow.

There can be no simple answer to this question.


Any reason not to apply for funding as a grad student? The question is hypothetical, but it came up in a conversation and I'd like to see if we can come up with a logical analysis and conclusion. For various reasons, graduate students might not be inclined to apply for funding.

By funding I mean grants or scholarships intended to support graduate students directly in the form of money given directly to the student. That is, I am not talking about applying for research scholarships intended to fund an experiment, buy equipment, etc. Here are a few (made up) examples.

Case 1 (Differential). I get 20000 of internal departmental funding but be encouraged by the department to apply for external funding. If I then get 5000 scholarship, then the departmental policy might be to drop the internal funding to 15000, so I don't apply for it.

Case 2 (Rich Student). I am very wealthy and I have no need for funding. I am a brilliant student and could probably get many different scholarships but I chose not to because I feel other students with less money need the money more.

The "Rich Student" scenario is slightly different than the "Differential" scenario. If I am rich then for sure some other poorer student could have gotten the money, whereas in the "Differential" scenario, I am now only getting 15000 so another student will get the 5000 anyway.

The problem with not applying for scholarships is that I don't get scholarships, and in many fields winning scholarships is good for your academic career. Perhaps in some fields this is more important than others.

Overwhelmingly I've heard that one should always apply for scholarships regardless of circumstances because of this. Of course theoretically, I could bypass my "rich student morality" by using it to do something useful for the community.

Personally, although I am not in these situations, I feel that it is most beneficial to always apply for scholarships, I would just like to have some kind of evidence that support this.

So to put this in a definitive question: for graduate students, is there ever a reason not to apply for at least a few available scholarships?

Reward to ratio of the application. If you already have some funding, and the additional funding is small compared to the time required to apply for it. For example, you have an NSF fellowship at ~$30k/yr, so it might not be worth applying to $2k scholarships which take a week or two of time.
Reward to ratio of the work. You don't want to take on a new project.
The project isn't relevant to your line of work.
You aren't qualified (GPA, citizenship, or status limitations)


As a full-time paid RA, should I get co-authorship on a paper that I have written? I am working as a full-time research assistant at a university. I recently wrote a paper almost entirely independently. The contribution of the professor I work under was limited to telling me the topic that the paper is to be written on, and providing minimal inputs on the drafts (things like changes in grammar, or the inclusion of another aspect of the topic).

Now he is presenting the paper at a conference, and is listed as the sole author of the paper. As far as I know, I am not even noted in the acknowledgements. Am I incorrect in thinking that I should be listed as at least a co-author on the paper?

The only reason I am confused is because I am paid for my work at the university. However the work that I have done on the paper goes far beyond my professional responsibilities. Furthermore, I was hired to work on a completely different project altogether, but am helping the professor with most of his research.

If you have written the paper, you certainly have the right to be at least a co-author. In fact, from what you said, it seems to me highly dubious that your professor should a an author at all.

Being paid as a RA does not waive your right of getting credits for publications you wrote. Your professor is also paid by the university.

EDIT:

If you would like to talk to your professor about this, I'd suggest that you talk politely. To be honest, I don't know how to do this, but I am sure this is important (and possible).

Thanks to Captain Emacs for their very valuable advice in the comment.


How to track the papers that cited one specific paper Problem

In order to understand a paper better, someone suggested reading the commentary of a paper X first before actually reading the original paper. However, this seems to be a nontrivial task since there is no easy way to forward-track papers that cite one specific paper (i.e. paper X) while backward-tracking is straightforward.

More generally, is there tool/service that could build citation graph of a pool of papers, which might be one way to do both forward and backward tracking.

Google Scholar is one of several repositories that has such a citation graph (and I find it the most straightforward for doing the task you are suggesting).

Every entry in Google Scholar that has been cited and had those citations tracked in Google Scholar comes with a "Cited by N" link; clicking that link gives you a list of all of those citations.

https://scholar.google.com/scholar?cites=17803823686299873243&as_sdt=5,50&sciodt=0,50&hl=en

You can also search within those citing articles.


What is a good ice-breaker question on the first day of the classes? I will be teaching for the first time to both undergraduate and graduate students in computer science, not in the US, and I am wondering

if I should take time to meet & greet with students
if so, what should I ask them? I know some questions are uncomfortable (anything that gives away socio-economical background for example), so I want to avoid uncomfortable questions. Should it be about the class? Should it be about their favorite movie?

The course will be online due to the pandemic.

"Ice breakers" are not a good way to meet people in any context.  When you are meeting a new class of students, it's better to:

Let them know what they need to do to succeed
Tell them about the resources they have available
Tell them why the class is important
Assess their current ability
Actually teach


Investigation of Academic Misconduct I'm not sure what to tag this question as, and I don't know if it should be on Law.SE.

If someone is being investigated for academic misconduct:

accused of taking photos of tests and sharing it online, which is explicitly disallowed by the professor
and during that investigation, there is no evidence of the tests on the person's cell/camera,
but there is evidence of other crimes (completely unrelated to the university) on their cell/camera (e.g., video of this person bullying a child),

can the university/investigators take any action?

I think no, because the investigators were only to investigate academic misconduct and nothing else. But also yes, because they have evidence of improper behaviour.

University personnel will investigate whether the rules and norms of the university are being upheld.  If an actual crime is suspected of having been committed, then in most cases they will contact the police or other authorities either in place of investigating or in parallel to their own investigation.  For certain crimes they are legally obligated to do so.

  I think no because the investigators were only to investigate academic misconduct and nothing else

Just because they are only there to investigate academic misconduct does not mean that they cannot report nonacademic misconduct to someone else.  If they found evidence of a literal crime, I don't know why they couldn't report it to the police.  (I'm not sure exactly what "Bullying a child" means, but if e.g. this included physical or sexual abuse I would certainly expect them to report it to the authorities.)

I think you are asking whether there is any covenant of confidentiality when you turn over your phone to them.  That's a legal question and I'm not a lawyer, but unless explicitly agreed upon in advance I don't know why there would be.  If your partner accuses you of cheating on them, you deny it, and they say, "Well then show me your phone," and upon searching your phone they find a video of you stealing a car, then your partner can certainly report you to the police even though that was not what they were expecting to find.  To my mind, having your phone searched by university personnel is more like having it searched by your partner than by the police.  In particular, university personnel cannot compel you to turn over your phone to them.  They can ask you to, and there might be negative consequences for you if you don't (just like with your partner), but that's not the same thing at all.

Furthermore: as far as I know, university personnel may act on information they find on your phone that is unrelated to the academic honesty issue in question but otherwise violates the university's code of conduct.  For instance if they found a video of you making racial slurs at a campus event, then that's not illegal but is (I hope) against their code of conduct, and so far as I know they could act on that.  However I do not know exactly where to draw the line.  For instance, if in an internet dating app you use language that would be disrespectful and inappropriate in university discourse, then presumably that is not their concern...but if that language involved another university official it might become more their concern, perhaps.  I'm really not sure.

Let me say finally that I've heard a few times on this site from students who have had their phones searched by university officials, but as a university official (faculty member) that's something that I have never done and would not think to do in almost any situation.  For instance, if during an exam I saw a student looking at their phone, then I would call attention to it, have them put their cell phone away, and pursue an academic honesty case against them.  But I would not ask to see their phone: since I tell students before the exam starts what they can and can't have out during the exam (in particular, no phones), looking at their phone during the exam is cheating no matter what, and the implication that they are breaking the rules to gain an unfair advantage is more than plausible whether I see what's on the phone or not.  (And what am I going to do, scream at the student to drop their phone immediately and run over to apprehend it before they can close an app?  This seems silly at best.)  I wonder though whether in other parts of the world academic culture is different: in the United States (and Canada; I spent 2.5 years as a postdoc there) at least, the idea that people do not have to casually turn over their personal property is quite strong.


How to approach a mistake I made in an abstract for a Conference? In about a month I will be presenting a poster among 100+ people in an international congress. However, I'm just realizing that I made a huge mistake in the abstract I sent (accepted of course), concerning a whole phrase (15 words) with numerical results. This doesn't change my overall conclusion, because combined with the other numerical results that I offered (which are fine, no mistakes), I reach the same observations.

I'm a last year undergraduate student in STEM, and I'm about to tell my advisor hoping for the best. But before I tell them, should I be prepared to send a correction to the organizers? I've been browsing the stack for a while and people seem to be super light on posters at conferences, so what are your thoughts?

Yes, send a correction, with apologies. It may be that they can make a change or not, but "due diligence" says you let them know. You might be prepared for the poster session with a hand-out sheet that also has a correction. Few may care, but some might.

And yes, let your advisor know. Don't worry too much. Mistakes happen.


Is it proper etiquette to keep religious content on official course page? Is the course site property of the university or the person engaging it such as a teacher, teaching assistant etc.,?

Is it proper etiquette to add religious contents such as quotes from religious texts, images of gods into scientific course pages in a secular institute?

In general, probably not, but there are cases where it might be reasonable. Religion is an immensely powerful force in human society, so inevitably it will impinge on science and sometimes it's appropriate to talk about that.

For example, the science of evolution has been under attack since its inception by those who believe in a literal reading of the Old Testament and other such texts. In a course on evolution it might be quite appropriate to present a quote from the Book of Genesis in order to discuss that opposition to evolution. What would not be appropriate there is to present it uncritically, casting young-earth creationism as some sort of equally-valid alternative to evolution.

Robert Oppenheimer apparently named the Trinity nuclear test after a religious poem by John Donne, and he famously quoted two passages from the Bhagavad Gita to express his reaction to the first nuclear explosion:

  If the radiance of a thousand suns were to burst at once into the sky,
  that would be like the splendor of the mighty one.

  Now I am become Death, the destroyer of worlds.

Those passages are tremendously evocative and have been re-quoted many times. There's even a Linkin Park album named for the "thousand suns" line. I wouldn't consider it improper for a text on nuclear physics to include those quotes.


How to to deal with advisor's criticism of my writing? I am about to finish my PhD, which means I have to write a lot. I am also a non-native English speaker, so my English sucks a lot, especially when it comes to formal writing. In contrast, my adviser is a very good writer and good writing is very important to him.

Whenever I write anything, from an e-mail that gets CCed or a draft or a paper, it attracts relentless criticism. I know that I am supposed to use this feedback to improve, but I am a bit tired of this “tough love.” I often get desperate and anxious because I feel I can’t write anything worthy at all. It causes severe writing blocks because whenever I am about to write a sentence, I immediately imagine it being totally destroyed and thrown into a garbage bin.

I do try to improve my writing by reading a lot of high-quality English texts and practicing on my own. I took an online course on writing and developed my own writing routine: at first, I plan paragraphs and the flow between them, write a first crappy draft, then edit into something tangible during multiple rounds.

I also try to incorporate my adviser's guidance. However, my writing morale is currently so low that it stalls my productivity. I do try to not take my adviser's criticism personally, which is quite difficult sometimes, but I am just so tired of being judged all the time. I know many students lack feedback from their advisers, but I am just fed up with feedback. Is there any way to get out of this hole?

This doesn't answer your question, but I think your real problem isn't your writing, but the way how you and your advisor communicate. What I suggest is that you have a sit-down with your advisor and raise the issue with them. Tell them what you told us - that their barrage of negative feedback is hampering your motivation and productivity, and that you would have an easier time incorporating their feedback if they could find a more positive way to phrase it.

Of course there is no guarantee that this conversation will go over well (some people think that "tough love" is the only way to give feedback, and others understand on a rational level that a more "sandwich" style of feedback works better for most people but are unable to change). However, you will never know if you don't raise the issue with your advisor.

Edit: to say a little bit about "writing better", the actual topic of your question -

You should also try to understand if your advisor is really dissatisfied with the mechanical aspects of your writing (spelling, expressions, grammar, paragraph construction) or with your skills in scientific storytelling. It seems to me that basic command of the English language is not a real issue for you, so potentially what your advisor is actually dissatisfied with is that you do not know the terminology of your field well enough, common rhetorical moves in your discipline, how people like to construct arguments, etc. If this is your problem, a general-purpose writing course is not going to help - you will need to study papers in your discipline to improve.


What is the point of a thesis defense presentation? Context: math master's thesis.
I get that I need to show up and be able to have a discussion and answer questions, etc. That's all fine and good.
But in my uni, 70 % of the thesis defence consist of my own presentation. Then maybe 25 % of the time is alloted for questions, and 5 % for grading.
What is the point of that 70 %?
Am I supposed to just re-summarize the entire thesis?

The point of the thesis presentation is so the examiners can see if you actually did the work in the thesis or not.
It's quite easy to paraphrase content from e.g. publications, to ask one's supervisor for assistance tackling technical aspects of the work. So, by seeing you present the work and asking you some questions about the content, the examiners can assess whether you actually understand what you're talking/writing about.
Think of it as a presentation followed by an oral examination on the content. Some tips (I am not a mathematician but hopefully these are generally applicable):

Be clear about what problem your work is addressing.
Be clear about why that problem is actually worth addressing.
Make sure you give due credit to the relevant literature (e.g. with citations).
Don't spend more than 1/3 of the presentation on the points above.
Focus on what your contributions were to solving the problem described above.

Hope this helps.


Is it okay to submit manuscript to arXiv after "revise and resubmit"? I've read this question about how some publishers (e.g., Springer) allows authors to submit to arXiv before journal submission, but they make authors wait for a year after acceptance to submit to arXiv.

My question is: Is it okay to submit to arXiv during the time when the paper is under consideration by the journal, for example after it has been "revised and resubmitted" but before final decision?

The version you mention is called a postprint. Publishers have various policies about them. You can use the SHERPA/RoMEO service to get a summary of the policy in place for a particular journal.

Here is an example of what you get for Lecture Notes in Computer Science, edited by Springer:

As noted in the comments, you do not necessarily need to abide by these policies, for instance if your funder has set up an open access policy.


When does one go for a double doctorate? I would love to know the circumstances under which people opt for a second doctorate degree.

Could a professor working in a university write up a thesis and submit it to his department to earn a second doctorate?
Do only those who want to remain in the university forever as students go for a second doctorate?
Are there any general merits/downsides to earning 2 PhDs, if you are perhaps assured of a research career after a good first one?

Generally you cannot get two PhDs in the same field. One could get a second PhD in a second field.

People who want to do research in multiple fields or in a multidisciplinary topic or wish to change fields may obtain multiple PhDs. Alternatively, as you suggest, people who want to remain students forever do that.

The main downside of doing multiple PhDs is that people may not see that you are moving on with your career. There is a career after getting your PhD, and obtaining a PhD is a small step along that career path. Hovering around getting multiple PhDs would be akin to getting multiple bachelor degrees. People may see you as a permanent student, not someone growing into a mature researcher.


Moving from business to academia I've been working in commercial software development for quite a while for now, and I'm getting more and more disappointed in the way things are being done here as time passes.

So I was thinking to get back to academia, but the problem is that even though I hold master's degree, I have just a couple of publications (rather weak, I suppose), and there are no letters of recommendation in my disposal. Moreover, all colleagues I can possibly reference are engineers, not a scientists.

Basically, I'm quite used to applying to jobs I do not fit entirely (I mean not 100% of requirements met) judging by their requirements list in commercial sphere, but how mandatory publications and references are? My estimation is that I'm still capable of at least supporting research project as a engineer, while regaining lucking researcher skills.

You question whether you satisfy the requirements for a position as a PhD student. The minimum requirement for such a position is a bachelor's degree, albeit, many positions will require a master's. You satisfy both of those requirements, so your move from software development to academia is entirely plausible.

You seem to believe that publications are required for a PhD student position. They are not, at least, not at many institutes. They are nonetheless useful, even "just a couple," even if "[they're] rather weak," since they demonstrate an ability to do research and an understanding of the research process.

You are concerned that your referees are engineers, rather than scientists. This isn't a problem, actually it is an asset, as is your software engineering background. Impact is a measure of success in academia and your real-world experience can guide you towards practical research problems that have more potential for impact.


The limits of self-plagiarism I'm currently writing my second paper.
Although the focus is completely different of my first paper, some aspects of the context are similar.
I am perfectly aware that self-plagiarism needs to be carefully avoided but what is the limit?
Indeed, a couple of sentences of my abstract or introduction are very hard to reformulate without making the sentence significantly harder to understand or really longer.
In this context, is it tolerable to reuse a single sentence in the abstract and/or in the introduction?
Edit: I forgot to mention that the submission is anonymous. This is why I'm so picky about self-plagiarism.

You have a misconception. Plagiarism isn't about the actual words. It is about ideas. Copyright can cover the expression of the ideas (the words). In other words, you can plagiarize even with a complete rephrasing of the original. But it is easy to avoid.
To avoid self plagiarism all you need to do is cite the original work. I'm assuming that the words you use are expressing the same idea though in a different context. And if you cite and you hold copyright then there are no issues at all. If you don't hold copyright then you either need to get permission from the holder or depend on one of the exceptions to copyright law (which varies from place to place). You may well be able to claim fair use. You might also be able to claim that your reuse of the sentence doesn't reduce the value of the original. Those are valid in some places. And some ideas can only be effectively expressed in one way.
The reason to avoid self plagiarism is a bit different from that to avoid ordinary plagiarism. A reader of a new work may need to find the complete context of the ideas. This includes other words and references, etc. If you don't cite, then that chain is broken for a researcher. This also applies to ordinary plagiarism, but the need to not claim the work of others as your own is typically thought to be the more important part there.


How true is the stereotype that PhD graduates are overqualified? I am a Masters student, and I think this is the only place in the whole internet that do not hold stereotyped negative attitude towards PhD recipients. From time to time,however, these sort of quotes scare me:

  Having a Ph.D can close some doors for you. The general attitude and stereotypes about Ph.D holders are that they're uber academics/nerds who can't really function in the real world--this is an especially pertinent attitude to pay attention to in technical fields like engineering and science. So it closes some doors. You've also got less jobs to choose from, since you're vastly overqualified for many and you probably won't be able to find any good entry level positions because people will just assume you'll get bored and leave as soon as you find something better, so there is a cost to having everyone think you're a genius. Quora

Well I study for fun and advancing my knowledge -- and the last thing I want is these sort of stereotypes. I know if I pursue for a PhD I will have little to no experience about working for a corporation, so how worried should I be? Can I have the same level of experience compared to my peer who might have chosen industry instead of pursuing PhD?

First things first - this question is very region- and field-specific, as cultural norms and views of academia differ a lot in different places. Further, this will naturally also be highly employer-specific, as not every recruiter or employer has the same sort of requirements, views and prejudices. Everybody who tells you that there is a hard and fast rule is lying.

That being said, there are a few observations that I think are pretty general w.r.t. the PhD job market:

Nobody hires you or pays you more just because you have a degree. It's a pretty common misconception that having an advanced degree somehow magically entitles you to higher pay even if you do the same job in the same quality than somebody without a degree. This is particularly pronounced in computer science, where there are a bunch of excellent programmers / software devs out there without degree. Don't expect to make more than them just because you got your training in an university rather than through participation in open source projects.
At least in central Europe, no smart person does not hire you just because you have an advanced degree. I am confident to say that in Switzerland, the sentiment expressed in your quote is entirely wrong. A PhD certainly does not close any doors. There are a lot of jobs where it will be useless, but I have not yet seen cases where it was actively bad for the applicant to hold a PhD.
There are a bunch of jobs out there where holding a PhD is in fact very good for you, even outside academia and research. Here in Switzerland and IT, consulting is one of those fields. Consultants with PhD look smarter on paper, and hence their time is easier to "sell" for horrendous amounts of money to customers. It is pretty well-established that in this case just holding a PhD will in fact give you better starting salary and better career opportunities in many companies.
Generally speaking, as a PhD holder, you will have less experience than somebody who worked in the industry for 5 years. Contrary, you should (at least hopefully) have a higher level of formal knowledge and understanding of underlying principles. What you need is either (a) a job that requires the latter rather than the former (various "evangelist" or innovation jobs come to mind), or (b) and employer that has a time horizon large enough to allow you to get experience and who has problems complex enough that they need somebody with deep fundamental knowledge. This is the reason that big tech companies such as Google, IBM, or MS, often also pretty aggressively recruit IT and math PhDs, rather than going for cheaper and more experienced professional software devs.


As an electrical engineer, should I study pure mathematics in my spare time or do a second bachelor degree? EDIT: Short version: Can a full time engineer ever hope to learn pure math up to masters level on weekends in less than six years without burning out mentally or is full time study required to achieve this goal?

I am an electrical engineer who has 100% decided to learn pure mathematics properly so as to expand my mind. Should I do this in my spare time or quit my job and do a second degree in pure math?

I'm 25, been designing hardware for two years and have learnt a lot related to electronics/magnetics/control theory/ embedded systems programming etc. I've reached a point where work is becoming very repetitive and I feel my brain is slowly dying. However, there are still small crumbs of very valuable experiential knowledge to learn as I do design after design. My salary will also significantly improve as I transition from junior to mid-level if I stay in my industry.

Is it possible to learn pure math properly in my spare time or should I dedicate 100% of my energy to it? If I do it in my spare time, can I hope to reach mastery in a reasonable timeframe (5 years), or is the nature and volume of the knowledge such that it requires full time attention? I don't know the extent of what I don't know. I also don't want to burn out.

Thanks

From your question, I assume that you are NOT interested in taking a degree in mathematics because you need to prove to somebody that you have a qualification. What follows is based on that assumption.

Learning 'pure math' is not the same thing as learning a language: pure mathematics is a myriad of languages. A bachelor's degree course in pure mathematics traditionally covers, shallowly, a very wide range of topics, most of which the students will never use again, even if they pursue careers as full-time professional mathematicians.

I strongly suggest to you that if you need a better understanding of some aspect of pure mathematics for some particular purpose, then you should study just that aspect of pure mathematics. You may need to rewind a bit to find a starting point that you do understand. And you may need to broaden out your reading as you go along.

If you have no particular purpose in mind, then just pick something that you are interested in. Do not expect to understand everything immediately. Do not be afraid to pick up non-academic 'popular science' type books. There are so many entry points that I am sure you will be able to find one that suits you.


Should I ask about the status of my PhD application? I applied for admission for a PhD at a university in the US in mid December.  After contacting a potential advisor, he told me that he is interested in my CV. However, I didn't get any response about the status of my application. So, should I send an email to the professor asking him about the decision of my application or should I contact the university directly?

It's usually the university that handled admissions. Your professor may not have any clue which stage your application is in. So your best bet is contacting the university graduate research department, and asking for timeframes around outcome.


Do you have to cite your own pre-print? I am writing a paper that is based on previous work I have done that I have published as a pre-print. I am submitting it to a conference. However it is significantly improved and different. The submission process is double-blind do I have to cite the pre-print? The idea and contribution is mostly the same.
I am in Machine Learning / Deep Learning field of research.

Across most of the social sciences, the answer would be: No, the published manuscript should not cite its own pre-print.
The pre-print is rather considered a draft version that happens to have circulated prior to its acceptance at a journal, where it transforms into its final version.
This seems to be grounded in the paradox of the published preprint being regarded as a preliminary, non-refereed and thus fictitiously unpublished paper (e.g., a Google search for "preprints are unpublished" yields enough pages with confusing semantics of that kind).


Manage communication with students (as advisor) I feel a little unproductive in managing students as their advisor. I have both undergrads and graduate students, and especially with undergrads, it's hard to make them respect scheduled updates.

Right now, I am using online tools to track their progress (on GitHub), but communication is lacking. I hate using email for these regular updates, since many of them even take two days to a week (sometimes more!) to check their email account (using University's address), moreover, it would be probably cluttering my inbox.

  What tools or communication services can I use to manage several students, communicating with them in a timely manner?

Thanks for any suggestions.

I institute a lot of different things, but in my personal experience, the best thing is face-to-face meetings. Weekly meetings with the individuals, to talk about the problem and issues they may have with it. If it's undergraduates that are less committed to you you can settle for every other week. Things get lost in digital communication, and your students will feel a lot less comfortable with having nothing to discuss week after week. I find services like GitHub/Dropbox/Sourcetree to be the most effective, but people have their own pet software that they're used to. I suggest emphasizing personal interaction above all!


Update a preprint on ResearchGate to conference publication after acceptance Is there a way to update a preprint on ResearchGate to the published conference version including accepted conference information etc.? I have not found a straightforward way to do this, I don't think deleting the preprint and replacing it with the conference version is a good solution especially if the preprint already has followers, comments etc.

I contacted Researchgate requesting to them merge two papers once (a preprint and a postprint). All they did was to delete one of the papers (unfortunately the 'better' of the two). Not recommended. Instead, I would suggest you either update the previous upload or upload a second version, preferably both. Update the old for your followers. I can't say for sure, but I think new uploads get some priority in the feed of other users. By performing both these actions you maximize the exposure your paper gets.


Can I wish my students all the best in the mid-term exam paper? I am setting up mid-term exam paper for engineering students.

As a new Assistant Professor, I will like to know is it okay
to put "All the Best with your exam" or "Happy Problem Solving" at the end of the question paper?

Will it be frowned upon by my colleagues or taken sarcastically by my students?

As a student, I'd appreciate my professor wishing me the best for the exam.

If I were to make a suggestion though, it'd be better to write "All the best" at the start of the paper, right after the general instructions section.

Even better if you could drop in before the start of the exam and wish the students in person.


Is it illegal to explain someone else's research paper on my website? Can I explain someone else's research paper on my website if I am properly citing the paper author with a link from where I got access to that paper? The website takes no credit for the paper but only explains it in simple words.

As long as you don't quote too extensively from the paper, but do formally quote as needed, you should be fine.
Giving credit avoids plagiarism. Avoiding excessive quoting avoids possible copyright infringement.
But cite the "paper" itself, not just the "paper author".
I've assumed that you have proper access to the paper.


Associate Professor vs Assistant Professor vs Lecturer I want to know the difference between associate and assistant professor in terms of contract length, status and salary. And also how both positions are published and what's the recruitment process of each one mainly in Europe and Canada?
What about lecturer positions in the US, could European PhDs land lecturer position in the US ?
Thanks

Here in the US, an assistant professor is an entry-level tenure track appointment but does not come with tenure.  An associate professor is the next level up and does come with tenure.  Tenure track appointments virtually always require a PhD but not necessarily from a US institution.
A lecturer appointment is a teaching position, almost never comes with tenure, and does not necessarily require PhD, though it does usually require a master's at minimum.
A typical initial contract is three years.
Open positions are often but not always posted on the department website.  Contact the department you're interested in for more info.  Typically, you'll be asked to supply a CV, references, various statements describing your objectives, teaching philosophy and research interests, and possibly a teaching demonstration video.  Obviously, all of this depends on the department.


Why did it become so much more expensive to start a university? In 1873, Johns Hopkins University was started with an inflation-adjusted $144.5 million. In 1884, Stanford University began with an inflation-adjusted $139 million. Meanwhile, in 2009, KAUST was started with $10 billion. There's a difference of two orders of magnitude.

Why did it become so much more expensive to start a university in modern times?

Besides all the factors that the other answer already lists, the elephant in the room is that KAUST has explicitly been designed to be a world-class university (rather than organically growing into one, as was the case with your other examples).

In short, it is not so much more expensive nowadays to found just any university - in fact new universities get founded all the time, virtually always spending considerable less money than $10 billion - but founding a university with the expectation that it will compete with the best in the world in a very short time frame is expensive. You need to compensate for all the natural growth in budget and prestige that established universities had over the last one or two centuries.


Summer research opportunities for undergraduates I am an American citizen but I am doing my undegraduate studies in math/physics in France. I am looking for a way to get some research experience this summer. My ultimate goal is to return to the US for graduate studies in physics, and it appears that research experience is a de facto requirement for admission to top programs.

It seems that in Europe summer research programs are not as popular as in the US, where the NSF funds the well-known REU program.

Unfortunately, the acadameic year at my school ends well after most REU programs begin. My school also does not offer research opportunites until the 3rd year, after the grad school application deadlines.

Are there any other options someone in my position might explore?

Are there any opportunities at your European school?  During the year or during summer?  Funded or unfunded?

You really don't need to do groundbreaking research as an undergrad.  Just doing something (some exposure) is plenty.  Your grades and scores are much more critical.  FWIW, I didn't have any research as I was working and playing a sport. Schools were fine with that.

When you get to grad school, there will be plenty of time to dive deep into research and to distinguish yourself by how well you do at it.


Transcripts required for application, but my school doesn't really have any I'm currently in the job market for tenure-track applications in mathematics. I have seen that some of the positions ask for undergraduate or graduate transcripts (both unofficial and official).

I have an issue, especially with graduate transcripts: I obtained my Ph.D. in France, and I didn't had any coursework or anything, only my thesis. Thus there are no transcripts per se, only a certificate that I completed all the requirements. Would such a thing be enough for positions asking for transcripts?

The request for transcripts makes sense for students from PhD programs in the US, since the PhD program typically includes a substantial amount of course work. In your case, all that you can provide is documentation that you completed the PhD.  I've seen many applications like this.  That should be sufficient to get your application to the search committee although the committee may be uncomfortable with your lack of graduate level courses.

For positions in which teaching is important, and the candidate will be expected to teach a variety of courses, it is reasonable for the search committee to look for evidence that a candidate has a broad enough background to teach a variety of courses as well as a willingness to do so.

You might be surprised by the breadth that is necessary.  For example, although my PhD dissertation was in optimization, I've taught lower division courses in calculus, discrete mathematics for computer science, linear algebra, and differential equations, plus upper division and graduate level courses in linear and nonlinear programming, combinatorial optimization, numerical analysis, numerical linear algebra, mathematical modeling, vector calculus, probability and statistics, stochastic processes, time series analysis, and discrete event simulation.  I acquired much of the background for this by taking courses in my PhD program and preparing for and taking preliminary exams in several areas of mathematics.

In my experience interviewing candidates for faculty positions, I've often been disappointed by candidates with non-US PhD's who were too narrow in their background and teaching interests.

Although you don't have a transcript of courses from your PhD, it would be in your interest to provide a transcript of courses that you took in your undergraduate and master's studies to provide some indication of your breadth.   You should also make a point in your teaching statement of explaining what you would like to teach, what you could teach even if it isn't your favorite area, and what you wouldn't feel properly prepared to teach.   This is also a question that is likely to come up during interviews.


Should I send a follow up email to a prospective PhD advisor? I was in contact with the professor in late September and had talked to home about applying to the school. I have since submitted an application.
Should I send an email to touch base with him and let him know I look forward to hearing from him?

There is nothing wrong to write an email to inquire about your application status, but I will suggest first contact the admission office. Remember it varies from school to school that how much a supervisor can play a role in admission process.


What are the economic incentives for professors to hire and train graduate students? I am a current graduate student at a research-oriented university. Nonetheless, for me, it is a big mystery why and how the professors are incentivised to recruit and train the graduate students.
In an experiment-oriented research group, graduate students are the work-force of the principal investigator, so the professors train the graduate students to conduct experiments and research so that they contribute to the research group. However, in theory-oriented research areas such as pure mathematics, theoretical computer science, and theoretical physics, in many situations, graduate students do not contribute to the professor's research. They receive training and guidance for their research career unilaterally.
It should depend on the system for each nation, but what are the designed incentives for the professors in such areas to hire and train graduate students other than volunteer service spirit? In addition, I have heard that there exists an incentive system to push the professor to let their graduate students graduate within a reasonable time. What is such a system?

Since you mention economic incentives, one obvious answer might be for teaching, at least this was the way it was in Germany. Even the most theoretical professor is supposed to teach a certain number of classes each semester. Generally the work involved in this is too much for one person alone, that is why the professor is supposed to do the lectures and the PhD students handle exercise classes and organisation. So its either supervise a bit on a research level or spend twice the time dealing with undergrad students having missed the deadline for their homework again because their grandfather died for the fifth time in this semester. Personally I'd know what I'd choose...
To this end each professor has a number of positions available, which can only be used to hire PhD students or postdocs. In particular it is not possible to hire someone to just help with the teaching without supervising them scientifically (Not that many qualified people would be willing anyway), or use the money for something else. Also like with any budget item, not using positions for too long is a great way to have them reallocated to someone else.
Regarding incentives to have them graduate on time, that one is also simple, if a bit unrefined: There is a maximum amount of years one can be employed in such positions. So in order to supervise the next student, the old one should be finished.
But I have to say that homo economicus is a spectacularly bad model for professors in theoretical subjects. Most of the ones I know are primarily motivated by science and would gladly work with a gifted student even without receiving any compensation.


Difference between transactions and journal I feel a little bit ashamed, but I have never understood the difference between transactions and journals. This question is quite related. However, I could not find any clear differentiation.
For example, in my little field (software engineering) IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering is considered the top venue. However, there is not an IEEE journal on Software Engineering (or whatever name). To be honest, I have never seen any publisher on software engineering having both transactions and a journal on software engineering. This is also why I fail do differentiate them.
This is what IEEE writes at its FAQ page.

What is the difference between IEEE Journals, Transactions, Letters, and Magazines?
Journals, Transactions, and Letters are the primary means for
publishing technical papers concerning original work in IEEE fields of
interest. [..] The primary purpose of
Journals, Transactions, and Letters is to disclose and provide a
permanent archival record of original technical work that advances the
state of the art or provides novel insights. Papers in Journals,
Transactions, and Letters should be of lasting value to the
professional as judged by the authors’ peers through a formal review
process. [..]

The omitted part is about letters and magazines, so it is not related. Am I really missing it, or they do not really differentiate?
What is the difference?

Transactions used to have a very specific meaning. From the New Oxford American Dictionary:

  transactions
  published reports of proceedings at the meetings of a learned society

In this historical usage, it is synonymous to proceedings, i.e. it is a published report of a conference or a set of meetings. Many learned societies have transactions: Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, Transactions of the Faraday Society, Transactions of the AMS, etc.. Some other institutions use the term “proceedings”, e.g. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science.

These transactions or proceedings were separate from journals, which do not have to coincide with a conference or meeting. However, with time the customs changed, and many of these reputable publishing venues became independent from actual meetings or conferences. But, because they were reputable (and famous is some cases), the name remained.