Contribution vs Motivation Can somebody explain to me what is the difference between contribution and motivation in any research paper?

Motivation: why is this an important problem? Why should anybody care about this?

For example:

  X affects tens of thousands of consumers in the United States each year, and costs companies billions of dollars.

or

  If we can solve X, we are one step closer to solving the biggest open problem in the field, Z.

Contribution: what is the new thing (result, approach, technique, whatever) that this paper describes, that advances the state of this field?

For example:

  This paper describes a way to do X using Y, which is up to 200 times faster than the current state of the art.


Book suggestions for teaching science at advanced level I teach in a university to Masters students in Science. I have taught courses from Physics, Statistics, Mathematics and Computation, and every time I finish teaching a course, I find myself unsatisfied. It is difficult to articulate what exactly I feel unsatisfied with, but it is probably a combination of choice of topics, the order in which I taught them, the total amount of depth I covered each topic to, the way I explained the concept, the type of problems I assigned for practice, the way I gave my feedback to student submissions etc. One thing that I always seem to fear while teaching is that even if I explained something, students may not have understood it. This makes me extremely conscious during the class itself, and once I start thinking about it while I am talking, I seem to forget things, which in turn leads to fumbling, and that feeling is disturbing.
Over the years, I have made active efforts to improve. However as the courses that I teach seem to become more and more difficult as I progress in my career, the improvement seems to be lagging quite a lot. During my bachelor's degree, I had devoured Feynman Lectures on Physics, and that motivated me a lot to become a good teacher. Even now while reading these, I "hear" the sentences in Feynman's voice with all ups and downs of the tone. I have also read the book "The craft of scientific presentations" by Michael Ally, and several other articles. Perhaps it is needless to say that I have tried to implement various strategies learned from these resources into my teaching. However, I still feel that my teaching is not up to the mark. When I think of some of the scientists I personally know, their teaching seems flawless (I have attended their actual in-person courses). Here I am not saying that each one of them mesmerize the students in the class, but that given their styles, everything seems to fall in place when they are teaching. Let it be a difficult calculation, or a complex explanation of conceptually difficult concept, they seem to get it done as if it is a piece of cake.
Given this, I am looking for books or other resources that specifically talk about great teachers and their teaching methods, especially in advanced science. The books should not cover just some algorithms which should be followed but they should emphasize how teaching can be approached as an art that can be learned and excelled. Two good books (about different topics) which are of this type are "Writing Science" by Joshua Schimel, and "Craft of Scientific Presentations" by Michael Ally.

I would say that it isn't necessarily good to focus too much on whether you "get difficult calculations or complex explanations of conceptually difficult concepts done as if it is a piece of cake". Instead, look at how students learn. Some difficulties are actually desirable for increasing learning and a presentation that is too smooth can backfire by making things look too easy. Not that this is an excuse for poorly prepared or executed instruction, of course.
Since you ask for a book recommendation, you might want to consult "Teaching and Learning STEM: A Practical Guide" by Felder & Brent. It contains many tips on getting students more actively involved in the learning process.


Using mendeley and science papers from sci-hub in Germany I am using mendeley to organize all my science papers and to keep things structured. From time to time capitalism forces me to get the texts from sci-hub which is not totally legit.

Now I noticed mendeley uploads the science papers to a cloud to save and synchronize them for different machines using that mendeley account. As I am uploading these papers again. So is there either an option to turn this feature off or is there any attention by any persons regarding this? If there is none I continue using it as it is.

In Mendeley you can turn off file syncing if you'd like, by folder or for all files. Right-click any item under "My Library" (folder name, "All Documents", whatever you like), and choose Edit Settings from the context menu. You will be presented with settings that includes Synchronization options, including an option for "synchronize attached files", which you can turn on or off as it pleases you.

In terms of checking copyright or digital rights management schemes, I'm not aware of any reference manager that cares about this - but then back in the days of Napster (or even the early days of YouTube) no one cared either, right up until they suddenly did. The main difference is that most reference managers, including Mendeley, have extremely limited file-sharing ability, as well as limited space requirements, so they tend to be more like a cloud file backup service than a file-sharing service. Also, historically, "digital rights owners" disagreed that even having a digital file was legal at all, even if it was just a personal backup copy, and this made the 1990's a bit weird in retrospect - but should not be an issue with academic papers, which are mostly digital now anyway. And when services are only backing up files only you are using, and often accepting payment to do so, there is far less incentive for anyone to care about the provenance of the materials.

If you are concerned about the availability of the files in-case a service suddenly decides to start erasing files they can't establish you were licensed to obtain (which seems unlikely and technically difficult to achieve in any useful way, but I can't predict the future - and passing files around between colleagues and students/teachers is so common that it would be really disruptive to attempt), you can instead just have a system like Mendeley organize the files into a folder that you then backup/save with a backup service/system. But if you are concerned about being targeted for having such material at all, I'm not sure that just turning off a feature like sync would actually do anything to protect you at all, as there is no guarantee a software could not still scan files and report back to the mother ship whenever it pleased anyway. So I'll have to leave it to you to decide how big of a risk you think that is, and whether it is worth attempting to mitigate.


Do Physics grad schools accept non-physics students with good Physics GRE score? These two questions https://math.stackexchange.com/questions/110303/is-a-good-gre-score-enough-for-a-non-math-graduate-to-be-accepted-in-a-decent-pu?rq=1&fb_source=message and https://math.stackexchange.com/questions/110303/is-a-good-gre-score-enough-for-a-non-math-graduate-to-be-accepted-in-a-decent-pu?rq=1 inspire me to ask this question.

Unlike Math GRE in Physics GRE, almost everything taught in first 3 years of undergrad is examined with almost equal percentage of total questions (Classical Mechanics 20%, EM 18%, QM 12%, Optics 9%) while in math, 50% can be scored only with good calculus skill.

Can one expect to be accepted in good physics grad schools if he has good Physics GRE score?
Another question is, can one go to theoretical physics grad school only with good score in Physics GRE?

I hope this is appropriate place to ask these questions.

Graduate admissions is based on lots of different factors.  I don't think any one thing will make you in-eligible for acceptance, at even the best institutions---including not being a physics major.  That being said, unless you have physics (or similar) experience, or are in a related field, it will hurt your application.  I know numerous people with math, computer science, engineering and chemistry backgrounds who have joined (and are doing well in) prestigious physics programs (e.g. stanford, chicago, columbia).

If you have experience in a not-too-distant field (e.g. chemistry), one way to make your application more appealing - would be if you are interested in subjects somewhere between physics and chemistry (for example).

If you can demonstrate that you have excelled in your own field, and have an aptitude for physics (e.g. good GRE scores), you shouldn't have a problem!


How to come up with research ideas? As a very new researcher who is exploring the best way to generate ideas, some guidance on this question would be very helpful. I have found that this is NOT easy. Ideas seem to pop out of my Professor every day and I wonder how he does it. This question is broad;

How do you tend to come up with initial/seed ideas? What is your search method (if you have one)?
What proportion of your ideas for past papers come from; (i) colleagues, (ii) intentionally browsing the literature for ideas, (iii) on the spot inspiration, (iv) conferences, (v) other?
How do you prioritize research ideas?
Is there any special, generalizable method that you've discovered to sift out those ideas that are likely to be unrealistic early on in the process of idea generation?

Based on small amounts of anecdotal evidence I have reason to believe that there is vast heterogeneity among professors regarding the above questions. For example, economist Steven Levitt says he works on 22 papers at once. A professor I know will have maybe 25% of this at any one time.

Related but not duplicate: Is there any software or tools for managing developing research ideas?

Okay, as you say, this is very broad, and possibly argumentative. So, I'll try to section off my answer for your various sub-questions, and talk not so much about how I do come up (and organize) research ideas, but how I see it done by everyone (including me).

Coming up with ideas

The most exciting phrase to hear in science, the one that heralds new discoveries, is not “Eureka!” but rather, “hmm... that's funny...” — Isaac Asimov

It's probably very akin to asking a large number of artists “how do you come up with inspiration?”, i.e. you can probably get one thousand different answers, and yet not useful answer at the same time. However, there are some elements that I think are common to all. You can't “trigger” new ideas to come into your mind, but you can put your mind into the right disposition to host these new ideas: recognize them and welcome them. Below is a list, certainly partial and limited, trying to detail my perspective in this matter:

Be challenged! Nothing sparks ideas more than being confronted with contradiction, healthy criticism, a spirited debate, maybe a bit of competition. Some people manage to do that by themselves, arguing against their ideas and improving them. I myself (and most of the colleagues and students I have seen) need an echo chamber, someone to discuss things with. If they're not exactly from your field, all the better, as they may have unusual/naïve/silly questions or expectations.
To give an example, some of the most “successful” ideas I have had came while answering questions, for example from a PhD student or colleague, and replying by “no, it doesn't work like that… in fact, it's probably always guaranteed to be false, because… see, it's linked to X… or maybe it's not? hum…”

Be curious! Ideas come from problems. Identifying worthy problems in your field of research, and dissecting larger issues into of specific problems of manageable scope, is at least as hard as coming up with new ideas. In the end my feeling is that, especially for a researcher, all ideas are the result of one’s curiosity.

Manage to get some free time for thinking (and not: teaching, supervising, tutoring, reviewing, writing, sleeping, …). Body and mind. Sure, an idea can pop into your head any time, but it's probably less likely to happen when you teach basic calculus all day that when you get some time to really think.

Know your field, know where a new development need to occur, what is currently missing. Read review papers, search for such ideas through people's articles or blog posts, discuss with senior colleagues who have a comprehensive view of the field, …
One of the ways you can come with ideas is by analyzing how different groups work in your fields, seeing what has been addressed and avoided, what big questions are still open, and how you can link between different works to build a coherent global picture… This is not always successful, but it usually generates some good ideas along the way!

Explore more or less closely related fields, and see if there is something from your background that you could apply to their problems, or ways you could build something together. Such ideas tend to be very strong, because you can oftentimes apply an entire branch of knowledge (ideas, methods, algorithms, etc.) to a very different problem. In that case, the added value comes from your different perspective, as you might try things that others would not think of.

Ways have been devised to come up with new ideas on a given topic, either alone or in group sessions. Brainstorming is probably the best know such method (and might be the most popular, in one form or another), but a really large number of creativity techniques have been developed. They can be applied both to enhance creativity or to boost problem solving efficiency.

Organizing ideas
A quote often attributed to Kant: “someone’s intelligence can be measured by the quantity of uncertainties that he can bear”. If that true, that has serious consequences for research. Accepting that your mind can only efficiently support a finite number of ongoing research ideas, you have to come up with ways to write them down, organize them, prioritize them, come back to them later, etc. Just as you cannot juggle with as many balls as you'd like, such “external” tools will help your brain focus on the ones that you assign high priority (or the ones to which it gives high priority; the brain works in funny ways).
Most people use very low-tech tools for that:

Notebooks, either sorted chronologically or thematically; in the later case, open a series of blanks pages for each new project/idea, and flip through the book whenever you want to check on them. I use a Moleskine (WP) for that purpose; having a nice, leather-bound notebook somehow helps me “value” it more and treat it with care (always have it with me, actually use it).

Post-it’s scattered through one’s (real or virtual) desktop. Downsides are obvious.

More people than I thought actually don't use any tools, and just keep all in their mind. Apparently it can be done, but I don't advise it.

But more complicated methodologies have been devised, that are supposed to help you with it:

Mind mapping, either on paper or software-based.
Using todo-list flat or two-dimensional todo-list software, or more complex task-tracking software (see, e.g. Trello).
The software side of this question is already covered (though possibly not extensively) here on this very Q&A site.

Finally, don't underestimate the possibilities opened by delegating: people in charge of a specific project or sub-project (PhD students or post-docs) can be tasked with maintaining a list of ideas by all contributors of the project, to come to later on.

Answers to your miscellaneous smaller questions:

What proportion of your ideas for past papers come from; (i) colleagues, (ii) intentionally browsing the literature for ideas, (iii) on the spot inspiration, (iv) conferences, (v) other?

Most ideas are hardly “traceable” to one source or another. A given idea might have formed in my head during a conference, seeing how people were failing to address a certain issue, then crystallized during a discussion with colleagues, but would never have occurred to me if not for a literature review I had performed a few months before.

I'll come back a bit later and continue working on this answer :)


Trouble with advisor in final Ph.D. phase I am a 6th year Ph.D. student in the sciences. The typical duration of a Ph.D. in my program at my institution is 5 years. I am months away from finishing the last component of my research; however, issues have arisen.

I am having strong doubts that my advisor cares about my success in my future career. In addition, she is forcing me to graduate in 2 months. While I myself would very much like to graduate as early as possible, I am faced with a series of challenges:
1. There is unfinished research work. While I'm not trying to solve the problem at hand completely, I do wish to produce something of quality, and for the manuscript under preparation to have a reasonable chance of being accepted.
2. I wish to spend adequate time preparing my thesis.
3. I need time to prepare postdoc and job application materials.

While someone as capable as my advisor may be able to finish all these in the time allotted, knowing myself, these tasks will take more than two months for me. And yes, I've discussed this with her many times, and she has been quite adamant about not financially supporting me after two months.

Recently, she has also asked me to withdraw my paper in a respected international conference, which has been accepted and selected for a meritorious award.

My specific questions are:

As a student, I may not understand the rationale of the decisions of my advisor, who is not only technically competent but abreast of the research community. However, I am having strong doubts that my advisor is advising in my best interest. I've had several arguments with her about the remaining work and I feel even if I do somehow defend my Ph.D., we will be on negative terms thereafter. Is it uncommon for Ph.D. students to leave on less-than-amicable terms with their advisor?
One of the options I've thought of is changing research advisors. However, I'd rather not change my research topic - the scope of my dissertation research has been approved my Committee after all. So, is it likely that a faculty member would be willing to serve as the Chairman of my committee in a topic only peripherally related to his/her expertise? As my advisor is senior in her field, I'd think a junior faculty member is unlikely to take on this role, in avoiding any run-ins with my advisor. Are there other considerations I've missed that may discourage a senior faculty member from agreeing to be my Chairman? (The university department is usually able to provide funding to students in their final semesters, so financial support may not be an issue.) And my committee members are either junior faculty or close collaborators with my advisor, so I doubt any of them would be willing to replace my advisor as the Chairman. Should my new advisor approve of my work, he/she may also serve a reference, which I will very much need for my upcoming job search.

Thank you. All advice is surely welcome.

I'm sorry to hear about your situation. I had to change my Ph.D. advisor (and I'm very glad I did), but it was in the early phase of my dissertation process. I'm quite surprised by your "discovery" about a potential of your advisor not caring about your career. Firstly, it is unlikely (why would she "tolerate" you for 5+ years then?). Secondly, if your advisor would truly not care about your career, it should have been pretty clear early in your collaboration, so either your assumption is not true, or you paid no attention to this aspect at all, which is quite difficult to believe in.

Anyway, in regard to your potential actions. I strongly recommend you to consider all possibilities to avoid changing your advisor, considering how far are you in the program. Changing an advisor is not only a administrative / logistical nightmare, but, if it would require you to start your research from the scratch or almost from the scratch, it would be extremely depressing, to say the least.

If you could save five years of work and life by defending your dissertation and graduating, even if parting with your advisor not very amicably, I would say that it is worth a serious consideration. The two obvious dangers in this case would be: 1) being able to defend dissertation successfully; 2) potential problems with obtaining a recommendation letter from your advisor (she could either decline, or give a negative or not so positive one). The second aspect is quite important, as your postgraduate applications, not listing your dissertation advisor as a referee, might raise quite a lot of eyebrows, with potentially negative consequences in regard to your postdoctoral offers / career.

You have to carefully think about all these (and other) aspects, consider feedback from people here and your own environment, but, ultimately, only you can decide the best course of action, based on various details, known to you only, as well as your gut feeling, as some new research suggests.

Regardless of what you decide on the subject and how you part with your advisor, I wish you to successfully graduate and achieve your professional and personal goals in the future. Be strong in staying your courses, but flexible in ways of reaching your destinations. Or, as Lao Tzu has said,

  Nothing is softer or more flexible than water, yet nothing can resist
  it.


How to publish thesis as a book after getting most of the thesis published as research articles How to publish thesis as a book after getting most of the thesis published as research articles in SCI journals. Do I need to get permission from the journals for copyright transfer before publishing the thesis as a book?

This depends on the copyright license or transfer you signed with the journals. These range all over the place: they may own copyright, you may own copyright, or somewhere in between. If you transferred copyright to the publishers and they did not grant back any rights, you cannot republish without their permission. (Moral for the future: DON'T TRANSFER COPYRIGHT if it is avoidable, which it often is.)

I suspect you will also have to spin this very carefully (and honestly) with book publishers; many will not want reconstituted journal articles.


how to write a dissertation acknowledgement that is not superfluous? A dissertation acknowledgment is important in the final works of a Ph.D research. After writing a scientific research, it's not easy for me to compose paragraphs to thank my supervisory committee, colleagues, fellow lecturers, etc. Could anyone help me by giving the idea how to work with it so my acknowledgment is interesting for everyone who reads it.

Here is what I think about the topic. Acknowledgements section is indeed an important part of any dissertation, obviously, not from a scientific standpoint, but from an ethical perspective.

Even if you have a good memory, I would still suggest to keep track of various contributions that other people made to your research and your overall success during the program. If you don't want to keep track throughout your program, it is IMHO crucial to make such list before finalizing and submitting your final document to the committee. On the other hand, if your memory is not that great, then keeping track of people's help during the program is a must.
As I also was trying to create a nice acknowledgements section for my dissertation, I have seen and read a wide variety of examples, ranging from quite brief and formal to very personal, which read more like a life story (while some are interesting, generally, I don't think you need to strive to make that section so - it should be sincere, cover most of people, which help you appreciate, and nicely written in terms of wording; however, it is not a novel or, even, a story, so I wouldn't at all worry about the being interesting aspect). I think that both extremes (too brief/dry & life story) are not appropriate or good, so I would recommend to write several drafts to create a writeup, nicely balanced in terms of content, people coverage, style and size.
Since I mentioned above the size aspect, keep in mind that some universities limit the size of an acknowledgements section (usually, such limits are spelled out in a Dissertation Guide). For example, at my school, that limit was one page. Needless to say that it was quite a challenge to squeeze maximum relevant information and keep the contents/style readable and balanced.


How can I get recommendation letters for PhD application, while just starting a PhD program? I am starting graduate school (PhD program) soon, but there's a very high chance that I can't stay in this program for non-academic reasons. Now I want to apply for somewhere else, but I don't know how I can get reference letters.

Since I applied for so many grad schools last year, my very patient and kind professors from my undergrad program submitted their letters for me at least 20 times. I bothered them a lot, they were very helpful, and I got into a relatively good program. I even went to them and gave them the good news of receiving and accepting the offer.

Over the last few months though, my situation changed, and now there's a considerably high chance that I wouldn't be able to stay here after this year. I can't get any letters from my professors this semester, because I'm just starting the courses, and I suspect I won't even have the midterm results out by the time I'm applying to PhD programs for next year. I also don't have a an advisor yet until the end of the first year. So, it seems like my only option is getting the letters from my undergrad professors, but now I have two problems:

1 - I have their letters on a dossier service, so I thought about just using the service to submit their letters to those schools that accept the dossier service. But is that ok? Shouldn't I tell them that I'm using their letters? They submitted their letters for my applications last year, and they don't even know I'm applying again this year.

2 - Even if I could use the dossier service, most of the PhD positions I'm applying for, don't accept the letters from the dossier service. In fact, since I'm mostly applying for positions in Europe, I'll probably need to have the letters directly sent to my prospective advisors. How can I ask those professors for submitting their letters yet another round?! I can't even explain the reasons to them, as probably they won't want to read a long email with details about my personal life, and I'm not there to go and talk to them in person. Is it a good idea to have the dossier service email the letters to the prospective advisors?! Could I ask the schools/advisors to make an exception and accept the letters submitted through the dossier service?!

(I did my undergrad in the US, and I'm currently a graduate student in the US.)

Seems to me that your best course of action would be to send short emails to your current letter writers. You can thank them again for their letters, but state that, unfortunately, for [personal/medical/visa/whatever] reasons, you'll likely have to leave. (Note that there is no need for all the details! If they're curious they can ask you to elaborate, but the first message from you can indeed be short.) Then ask if you can re-use the letters from the dossier service for the positions that allow for that, or if they'd be willing to send letters directly. If they wrote their letters hoping you'd do well they'd likely agree to both, or, ideally, even to update and adapt the letters for the new positions.

I think that tactic has a better chance of working than convincing new professors to use a dossier service they're not familiar with, and it avoids your letter writers from feeling you went behind their back. Indeed, things could go sour if one of the advisors you apply with were to contact your letter writers to check if everything's above board and cleared with them.


How to make a paper's author willing to help me with his source code like a semi-supervisor? I am really in trouble. I am doing my MA thesis on wireless sensor networks, and I have a source code with more than 16 files and each one more than 5000 lines. It's very complex and has no documentation and that source code is all I have to do my thesis.

I am totally dependent on the author's help. I have been working on his code for almost three months now but because of the lack of documentation, my progress is very very slow. Also, my supervisor has no knowledge of the concept or the source code, and I have no time to change the supervisor, concept or source code.

So, how I can tell the author of the code please help me? How can I make him willing to help? What should I tell him in the emails?

By the way, he answered my questions in the past. I asked three questions and he answered them. I've previously asked about the etiquette of repeated emails to him in this question.

But I need his help like semi-supervisor. By the way he is a kind person as far as I know.

No one can really 'make' anyone willing to help you.  However, some things to consider that may convince the author to help.  In your email communications:

demonstrate your understanding of the source code.
Be specific in what you ask - don't do the "I don't get any of this" type of message.  Use your understanding, research and testing to help focus your questions.

Make sure you have your understandings and questions ready before you email, do not send multiple emails before they have a chance to reply and try and put most, if not all of your questions in a single email.  Be patient when waiting for a reply and be courteous and thankful for information provided.

Have your supervisor/advisor look over your questions before sending it (if you're unsure).

Remember, most of all, the author is under no obligation to even reply, and definitely not under any obligation to do your work for you. Bear in mind that they will have time-taking obligations and duties that take priority.


Would it be a poor choice to focus on disability in both my personal history statement and diversity fellowship response? I am working on my application to UC Davis. It requires a Personal History Statement separate from the Statement of Purpose. I've been through this process with UC Berkeley, and the prompts are almost exactly the same. Davis, however, also has a diversity fellowship that I'd like to apply to that requires a short statement, and if I leave my Personal History Statement essentially the same as what I submitted for Berkeley, I'm afraid I may repeat a lot. I'm trying to figure out if and/or how to make them distinct.

This is the Personal History Statement prompt:

  The purpose of this essay is to get know you as an individual and potential graduate student. Please describe how your personal background informs your decision to pursue a graduate degree. You may include any educational, familial, cultural, economic, or social experiences, challenges, community service, outreach activities, residency and citizenship, first-generation college status, or opportunities relevant to your academic journey; how your life experiences contribute to the social, intellectual, or cultural diversity within a campus community and your chosen field; or how you might serve educationally underrepresented and underserved segments of society with your graduate education.

In my personal history statement, I talk about the interaction between my having a significant physical disability and the progression of interest and confidence in my ability to succeed in higher ed, discussing in one para. some of the challenges I faced. I also talk about helping interpret for my sister, who had speech production limitations after getting a tracheostomy -- how it really made me cognizant of language and grew a desire to affect some kind of difference for those who have language challenges.

The diversity fellowship prompt says to briefly explain how you fulfill their criteria. The ones that could apply to me are these:

  To be eligible for a fellowship that promotes diversity, applicants must have an interest in an academic career in teaching and research, be a United States Citizen or Permanent Resident, and meet one or more of the following criteria:

  Demonstrate potential to bring to their academic research the perspective that comes from their understanding of the experiences of groups historically underrepresented in higher education or underserved by academic research generally.
  Provide evidence of academic achievement while overcoming barriers such as economic, social, or educational disadvantage.
  Demonstrate potential to contribute to higher education through the understanding of the barriers facing women, domestic minorities, students with disabilities, and members of other groups underrepresented in higher education careers, as evidenced by life experiences and educational background. Examples include, but are not limited to:

  b.    ability to articulate the barriers facing women, racial minorities and other groups in fields where they are underrepresented;

I have fairly substantial experience volunteer tutoring ESL to refugees, too. I'm trying to figure out where and how exactly I could talk about that. So, my question for you all is, would it be a poor choice to focus on  my disability in both statements?

The two sections are read by two different (if sometimes overlapping) committees. The personal history will be read by the general admissions committee. They might note issues of diversity and disability which can lead to a fellowship, but if there is a separate question for that -- they may assume that that information will be duplicated there. Still, if your disability played a significant role in shaping who you are as an academic -- the kinds of questions and approaches, or the empathy you bring to particular subjects or students -- I would include it in your personal history statement as that will speak to your motivation for study.

The diversity / disability fellowship question is also important. There are many small fellowships in the UC system and faculty try very hard to ensure that students get every penny they can -- but this is only possible if students self-declare. I would not feel shy about repeating any information in the diversity fellowship response -- again, you want to ensure that you have the funds to study what you want to study.


Doing Math Research in a "non-mathematical" environment I have graduated with a PhD in pure mathematics about 18 months ago and right after my graduation, I started working for a private college, teaching some low level courses such as College Algebra and Calculus. I have not done any research since my graduation but I always feel that my life is incomplete without research level mathematics. My college has a good environment in many ways but not mathematically.

But I still want to pursue my dream of doing some research in mathematics. Here are some facts about my situation:

Changing Job: For personal reasons, I do not want to quit my job, at least for now. I may consider a new job after five or ten years. But I would not mind finding a part-time job.
Funds: My college provides a very small fund for my academic usage, including purchasing books, travelling to conferences, etc.
Personnel: There are only a few mathematics teachers here and none of them is doing any research level mathematics. So I can hardly find any mathematical support in my college.
Motivation: I will not get promoted or receive any salary raise, whether I publish any paper or not. So my motivation will be from love of mathematics and (possibly) another job in the far future.
Resources 1: I do not have access to good data bases such as MathSciNet. My school library carries very limited books in my area but I can go to a good library in another university if needed.
Resources 2: There is a good university within a reasonable driving distance and there are a few mathematicians there in my field.
Time issue: During the semesters my spare time is very limited. I have more free time during the winter and summer break that I am willing to devote to mathematical research.

Any suggestions for me to do my research in this environment will be greatly appreciated.

The proximity of a large university can be a big plus.  Here are some things you might find helpful:

Get in touch with the people in your field there, telling them you are in the area and are interested in keeping up with mathematical activities in their department.  Ask to be added to their mailing list for seminar announcements, etc.
Try to arrange your teaching schedule so as to be able to attend seminars at the big university at least occasionally; regularly, if possible.  If there is dinner after the seminar, try to go.  Talk with the faculty (and the visiting speaker) and look for shared interests, that might lead to things you could collaborate on.
See what kind of access you can get to their library.  At minimum, you should be able to walk into their library and use MathSciNet, read books, download papers from their journal subscriptions, etc.  You can probably also arrange borrowing privileges, and possibly remote access, either as a member of the general public (maybe for a fee) or as a professional courtesy based on your affiliation with your own institution.  The university's faculty in your area might be able to help if you run into bureaucratic hurdles with this.

Also, don't discount your own institution's library.  Even if they don't have much in the way of books and subscriptions, it is very likely that you can get almost anything you want via inter-library loan, albeit with some delay.  Get to know your professional librarians.

And a note regarding funding: it's not unusual for conferences to have some travel funding available for participants.  (This is more common for smaller specialized conferences than for big general events like the Joint Math Meetings.)  Fresh PhDs like you usually get first priority for this, so try to take advantage while you can.


What exactly happens in your arXiv account if you no longer have institutional affiliation? The question is similar to this one but in addition I would like to ask the following:
Don't  I need to change my email address if I am no longer affiliated to an institution?
 Won't a new mail of the form www.someone@hotmail.com  make me lose ownership of all my papers and then need endorsement from another arXiv user?

Thanks in advance!

Log into you arXiv account and change your e-mail address.  You don't need access to your old e-mail to do this, nor will you lose your arXiv account if you don't have an academic e-mail address.  (Having an academic address is not a requirement for arXiv participation, after all.)  Once you have an account, there is nothing (short of administrative action) that would cause you to lose ownership of your papers or your existing endorsements.  It should be no different from changing your e-mail in any other account you have online.


What is letter of interest I am going to apply for a postdoc position and one of the required documents is

  letter of interest.

Is it the same with research statement?

The requested documents are cv, list of publications and thesis and recommendation letter.

In this context, "letter of interest" should mean the same thing as "application letter."


Are Online First articles considered "In Press"? I'm a little bit confused about this point. If an article has appeared as an Online First article for a print journal, is it still considered "In Press" or is it considered published, and so no longer "In Press"? Or is it only articles that have not cleared the Production Stage yet that are considered "In Press"?

I'm thinking some journals take ages to assign an issue number to accepted articles, so they might stay on the journal website for quite a while until they have one. Some funders want you to attach publications to the grant application that are "In Press", but not "fully" published publications.

Thanks a lot for your help!

My understanding is, online first articles are completely published except for the fact they aren't assigned to an issue. There's literally no production work left. They will also have a DOI. Therefore, although you can't give the full reference yet, you can list it in the application giving the journal name & DOI.


For graduate admissions, are difficult classes valued over perfect grades? I am an undergrad at a top 5 research institution for context, and this is pertaining to math Ph.D. admissions.

I know looking at grades in isolation w.r.t. admissions is a questionable thing to do in the first place, but from an admissions perspective, are difficult classes valued over perfect grades? I guess the example in mind would be, is it better to have a couple of difficult courses + mostly undergrad courses with all As, or a lot of difficult classes but some Bs sprinkled in?

I think this is a pretty easy one.

  I know looking at grades in isolation w.r.t. admissions is a questionable thing to do in the first place, but from an admissions perspective, are difficult classes valued over perfect grades?

Yes.

  I guess the example in mind would be, is it better to have a couple of difficult courses + mostly undergrad courses with all As, or a lot of difficult classes but some Bs sprinkled in?

The latter is distinctly better.  I got a B in the first graduate course I took as an undergraduate.  (I then took 8 more graduate courses and got A's.)  This did not stop me from getting into all the math PhD programs to which I applied, including the top three in the US.


Should I use double quotes throughout the paper even after defining the terms in the introductory section? Say I have introduced/defined some not-so-common terms like "clock register", "ancilla", etc. in the first section of a research paper, and while doing so I kept them within double quotes. However, I was wondering whether even during the subsequent occurrences of those terms I should use double quotes or not.

What's the convention regarding this in the physics and computer science communities?

The usual convention in CS:

Use italics when you first mention the term and define it.
After that, you will use it just like any other word. No italics, no boldface, no quotation marks.


Applying for a PhD group who has asked for my research interests So I am applying to a research group in Quantum Optics  and Quantum
Information. The professor has asked for my research interests and why I would like to join his group. My research interests are in the same field that he is researching but is not exactly to the point. For example, someone might be researching on the shape and size of the apple but I'm interested in the color and taste. We are still researching in the same field and I am also interested in doing my phd in the project he's working on.

How do I express my research interests in this situation? Also, when someone asks "why are you interested in joining my research group", what are the usual points or aspects you talk about?

When someone asks, why are you interested in joining my research group, what are the usual points or aspects you talk about?

You have to read up on what the PI and the postdoc(s) and the students are doing and read some publications.  Then when you are asked that question, you can say what you found interesting or exciting about what is being done in that group.


Germany PhD application: "Work Certificate" I am a master’s student (physics) in the US, and I am applying to this PhD position in Germany. This is what the application website says:

  Please apply online and provide a cover letter next to a CV in English, as well as your work certificates in one single pdf-file.

I just want to make sure what “work certificate” means. Is that just transcript/enrollment certificate from my master’s and bachelor’s university?

German here.

I guess that's just a questionable translation of the standard German phrase Arbeitszeugnis (pl.: "-se"), Arbeit=work and Zeugnis=certificate, diploma.

In business, Arbeitszeugnisse would mean a collection of diplomae, plus (relevant) testimonials from your former employers, or qualification certificates.

In your case, it'll probably a small collection, maybe just the diploma. That's absolutely fine at this point of your career. But if you already happen to have some experience as a lab/teaching assistant, or have worked in a related industry branch during non-term, providing some evidence might be a bonus.


Is it a good idea to write an inquiry email to professors when applying for a Masters program in Europe and Asia? I have read a lot of suggestions on mailing professors beforehand when applying for PhD. I, however wanted to know if the same strategy applies to a Master's program too?
I have been a professional for a few years, and I am applying for Masters in some top universities in Europe (Germany, Netherlands, Sweden) and Asia (South Korea, Singapore, HK) in CS (specializing in Data Science or Machine Learning).
However, I don't have any research based credentials and I became interested in research as part of my job and I want to maximize my chances of being accepted into a program because I have a poor CGPA (also failed in some core courses but managed to graduate in time) and NO academic recommendations (I have only professional recommendations). Also, I don't have any specific research idea - I would probably just work on what the professor is working on.
I had tried last year for Masters programs in the USA but got rejected everywhere. I don't want to repeat the same again.
Does it help at all mailing particular professors asking them if they are taking Masters students in the coming year?
Edit: I am applying for Research based masters because over the years I think I have more than made up for my poor grades by taking lots of MOOCs.
EDIT 2
What it eventfully boils down to is given that I HAD a slightly poor record, NO academic recommendations, BUT a great PROFESSIONAL record and a drive for learning...how do I MAXIMIZE my chances in for a RESEARCH based MASTERS program?

In Germany individual professors are not involved in the admission of Master students. So if you're hoping that it will positively influence your chances, there's no point.


What is a numerical value in admission application context? I am applying to few universities (Master's degree) and one of them which is University of Helsinki is asking for numerical value included in computer science studies from my degree. Exact question:

  Please state the total amount of computer science studies included in your degree (numerical value, credits/study hours etc.)

My current degree is from Lithuania. I am confused about numerical value. Could somebody elaborate on this matter? In addition, any suggestions what else should I mention to answer this question fully?

My understanding is that they want to know how much of the total workload of your degree was dedicated to the topic of computer science. You're relatively free to choose in which way to quantify this workload (e.g. total number of hours of the courses on computer science), but since you're in Europe, my suggestion is to use ECTS: you may be able to get the amount of ECTS credits for each course directly from your university student's guide.


How to describe a situation in which you "throw things at the wall and see what sticks" in a master thesis For context, i'll describe the problem. I'm working in chromatography, and the first part of the work was to do TLC experiments to narrow mobile phase compositions for separation of valuable components of plant extracts through column chromatography. In these experiments, we found that there were impurities that could not be moved by ANY type of mobile phase. We tried several procedures, but none were effective, we just abandoned this problem because something else became evident.

I'm now writing the description of the events in my thesis, and I have a whole subsection with a structure of "we tried this, here is a picture, you can see it did not work", repeated something like 5 or 6 times. Those SHOULD have worked, but they didn't. Imagine having a car in which the engine chugs and does not start, you replace the whole engine, and then the car continues to not start.

I am therefore stuck in a situation in which I can only describe an additional two procedures as "throwing stuff at the wall and seeing what sticks". I am however pretty sure you can't actually write that on a thesis. How should I express this?

It would be best to explain why such experiments were conducted along with supporting concepts that you would like to verify. It ought not to look like a random set of trials.

You may write something like this:

  Concept X follows from [explanation of X]. This concept formed the hypothesis Y to justify the following experiments. ... Although the experimental results were negative, it would be of worth to note them here as to why they were so.


Is it okay for a professor to leave the classroom only 5 min past the class start if nobody has shown up? Last week, because of a subway delay due to bad weather I arrived 15 minutes late to class to find out my professor had left 10 minutes before because nobody else had arrived.

Was it okay for him to do that? Would it be rude to complain about this matter?

We are just 4 students between mid 20's to mid 30's, this is a grad school elective course with a single session of 3 hours every week, starting at 17:00 ending at 20:00.

I'm also a former TA and currently a lecturer of an undergrad Physics 101 course, so I'm aware of how it feels when even half of the class is missing.

Update version 2 Today I was the only one to attend (unsure about the reasons my classmates had, the weather was OK this time). And talked to the professor about the issue. He said this situation wasn't his problem. About the weather/commute issue he said this: "Of course I know that happens, I'm much older than you". Then decided there wasn't enough people, handed me the class notes saying we will skip theory again because "everyone is irresponsible" (exact words again) and left. I'm dumbfounded a second time.

Final update I decided to let it be for now. I'm not going to pick a fight alone like a crazy person (my classmates don't see a problem, neither with the professor's behaviour, nor theirs). If the situation takes a turn to the worse, I'll just withdraw for the course and hope someone else teaches it next year. Thanks for everyone's interest :) never expected so many comments!

I think this is less about regulations and more about respect and conditioning the students. Also, don't feel offended, you are not the (primary) reason for what happened.
Legitimate Reasons for Leaving
Respect
The fact that 0% of the students arrived shows the professor an

immense lack of interest in his teaching subject ("I disdain the subject that you spend years researching and thus I disdain you.")
OR complete disregard of his didactic skills ("You are so bad at teaching, that I don't think I can gain anything from your lecture.")
OR disregard of his personal status ("You are such an unimportant person and your status is so much below me, that you will have to adjust your life to mine and wait for my arrival.")

Even if the class only consists of 5 students, he might extrapolate that everyone has one or more of these convictions. If he waits for students to arrive, he accepts his lower status and/or personal offense.
Operant Conditioning
If the professor waits for students to arrive, they will be conditioned that coming late  has no negative consequences. Canceling the class will incur a penalty to students and might force them to take arrival times more serious in order to gain the advantage of having the course material explained to them.
Recommendation
Communicate (in person or via e-mail) to the professor

that you are very sorry for your absence
state your reasons (should be severe enough)
and make sure to allude to one more of the three points mentioned in the respect section.

If he feels that you have legitimate reasons for being late and that your absence was not a sign of disrespect, I am sure that he will be more inclined to wait longer next time you are late or might even offer you to come by his office to "pick him up" for the lecture.

OP's Update
(This should probably be a new question, since the update significantly changes the circumstances.)
I am very sorry that the professor refused to give a lecture for you alone.
It is not your fault that you were the only present and thus it is imho unfair that you have to bear the consequences.
Updated Recommendation
I would approach him again

start with how unsatisfactory the situation for him and you is

again alluding to the respect section and

then ask him: Why do I have to bear the consequences for the action of other students? hoping that he is rational enough to realize his mistake. Basically you should try to make him understand that he does the same to you that other students are doing to him.

Maybe he was just disappointed about the low presence again and is an overly emotional person. Unfortunately that is not something you will be able to change.
If this does not resolve the situation I would ask around the department for existing regulations regarding this.


Reliable method to find ISI rated Journal I searched in internet and all I found was that we have to search the name of journal in "https://mjl.clarivate.com/" and if it indexed as: SCIE or SSCI or ESCI then the journal is indexed as ISI journal.
but I wanted to submit my paper in "https://academic.oup.com/painmedicine" and I serached it in clarivate and it said that it is indexed as SCIE. But when I email to the editor of painmedicine journal he said that their journal is not rated or indexed as ISI. Now I am very confused that which journal is ISI?

The approach you found - that of looking for the journal in the Master Journal List of Web of Science (WoS) - is the correct one. Pain Medicine is indeed indexed in SCIE and thus in one of WoS' databases.
Note that WoS was originally created by ISI (Institute for Scientific Information), but is now curated by Clarivate Analytics. Thus, the label of an "ISI-rated journal" is not entirely correct, and it is possible that due to this incorrect label, the person with whom you corresponded did not understand what you meant.


European COST Actions I would like to ask if you think  the European COST Actions are interesting for researchers? Do you see any potential advantage to join any of them? If yes, I would like to ask you how I could join one action of my interest, they do not explain properly in the website.

Thank you very much in advance.

You can get involved in a COST Action through various means and steps, as explained in http://www.cost.eu/participate

In short, you can join as a member of a workgroup of the Action (wide open), as a management committee member (or substitute) - nominated by your country for an already accepted Action, as a proposal submitter - almost automatic nomination, as a (usually Ph.D. student) researcher participating in short-term scientific missions (STSM), etc.

If it is interesting? I think yes and that's why they are there (and receiving funding) for some 40 years now.

IMHO: Being involved as an external expert (e.g., to evaluate proposals) is the hardest path as your role assumes that you understand how the whole thing works so as to provide a fair evaluation. While there are guidelines in place to help you with this, having first-hand experience by being involved in some Actions is much more useful.


Is it rude to ask the lecturer whether there is any “effective prerequisite”? Situation: My university has an online course registration system. Students (including me) choose courses in the system and submit their requests at certain time.

Sometimes, the course information is not detailed enough. A lot of course information in the catalog contains no or unreasonable prerequisite. For example, no prerequisite is listed in the information of a MATH 4000-level (fourth-year) course about real analysis. Another example is that a CSCI 4000-level course about cloud computing has a very minimal prerequisite course (something like an introductory OS course).

I am not sure whether it would be rude to email the lecturer in advance, asking whether there is any prerequisite not stated in the online system. While I am feeling OK to ask the lecturer if none of the “effective prerequisite” is stated for a 4000-level course (as I believe there must be some), I feel a bit sorry in the second case because it appears that I don’t trust the department’s course director and I chose to, in some sense, challenge the lecturer.

I did send an email asking the prerequisite of the cloud computing course. Initially I expected the lecturer to require me to have some basic knowledge about, e.g. graph theory, database system etc. He replied to me that there is no other prerequisite, though. For some other reasons I decided not to take that course, but I think similar situations may appear in future.

Any help is appreciated.

I wouldn't phrase it in terms of "effective prerequisites".  But it's certainly fine to discuss with the professor whether you are adequately prepared.  You could visit their office hours, or send an email:

  Dear Professor So-And-So:

  I am interested in taking your course MATH 4321.  I see that no prerequisites are listed, but I was wondering what background knowledge is expected, and whether I'd be ready for this course.  I've taken related courses X, Y, Z and feel comfortable with the material from those courses, and have also had some experience with topic Q.  Does this seem sufficient?  If you can recommend specific topics to review, or additional reading, I would appreciate it.  Or, if there are other courses I should take first, that would also be helpful to know.

If you like you can attach a copy of your transcript.


Math - PhD or Master's + PhD? I'm an undergrad and have been looking at my professors' CVs. While some of them went straight from earning their undergraduate degree to earning their PhD (which is what I was thinking of doing since it seems more direct), I noticed several of them first earned a master's degree in pure math after finishing undergrad, then went to another institution to earn their PhD. I was wondering if there are any overall benefits/drawbacks to earning a master's degree at one school and then entering a PhD program at another, versus jumping straight into a PhD program?

I can't speak for purest math, but many parts of computer science overlap so I think there may be some similarity...

If you know that you want a Ph.D. and are able to get into a good Ph.D. program straight out of undergraduate, more power to you: this is a fine path to go on.  This may not, however, be possible or desirable for a number of reasons.  Some examples of good reasons to get a Master's at one institution before switching to another:

You might not get into grad school on the first try, and a Master's program is a good place to progress academically while you prepare to try again (this was one of my reasons)
The Master's is a natural break-point for transferring to a program that is stronger or a better fit.
Non-academic reasons, such as family issues, following a partner, visa problems, etc.


What is the acceptable similarity in a mathematics PhD dissertation when checking by Turnitin? I have checked the originality of my PhD thesis in mathematics using Turnitin. The similarity was 31%. Is this percentage acceptable by most committees?

Is this percentage acceptable by most committees?

This is the wrong question to be asking, since academic decisions are not made based on a numerical measure of similarity from a computer program.  The purpose of this software is to flag suspicious cases for humans to examine more carefully.  It will identify passages that appear similar to other writings, but it can't decide whether that constitutes plagiarism.

For example, part of your thesis might be based on previous papers you have written.  In some circumstances, it may be reasonable to copy text from these papers.  (You need to check that your advisor approves and that it doesn't conflict with any university regulations or the publishing agreement with the publisher.)  Of course you would need to cite the papers and clearly indicate the overlap.  It's not plagiarism if you do that, but Turnitin doesn't understand what you've written well enough to distinguish it from plagiarism.  So it's possible that Turnitin would flag lots of suspicious sections, but that your committee would look at them and see that everything is cited appropriately.

If you haven't committed any plagiarism, then you don't need to worry about this at all.  If you genuinely write everything yourself (or carefully quote and cite anything you didn't write), then there's no way you could accidentally write something that looks like proof of plagiarism.  There's just too much possible variation, and the probability of matching someone else's words by chance is negligible.  The worst case scenario is that Turnitin flags something due to algorithmic limitations or a poor underlying model, but human review shows that it is not actually worrisome.  (Nobody trusts Turnitin more than they trust their own judgment.)

I'll assume you don't know you've committed plagiarism, but it is possible that you honestly wouldn't know?  Unfortunately, the answer is yes if you have certain bad writing habits.  For example, it's dangerous to write while having another reference open in front of you to compare with.  Even if you don't copy anything verbatim, it's easy to write something that's just an adaptation of the original source (maybe rewording sentences or rearranging things slightly, but clearly based on the original).

If that's what worries you, then you should take a look at the most suspicious passages found by Turnitin.  If they look like an adaptation of another source, then it's worth rewriting them.  If they don't, then maybe Turnitin is worrying you unnecessarily.

But in any case a plagiarism finding won't just come down to a percentage of similarity.  Any percentage greater than 0 is too much for actual plagiarism, and no percentage is too high if it reflects limitations of the software rather than actual plagiarism.


I am an Undergraduate Student who landed a job as a Data Scientist. Should I pursue a PhD and can I do it while working full time? I just graduated with a computer-science bachelor’s degree and accepted a job offer as a data scientist with a well-known company. It is a research role; so I’ll presumably be working towards goals that are also academic in nature.

Now is it possible for me to find an advisor who would be okay with me working full-time? I’ve interned for this company and they have no issues with sharing any research as long as no confidential data is involved; so I will be able to publish and share some of my work with an advisor.

I am really enamored with the idea of having a PhD – for the sake of having a PhD (which is silly, I know). However, I’m hesitant to put my life on hold or quit my job so this is the only option left to me.

There cannot be a definite answer to your question, because we lack basic information regarding the project, arrangement etc.

I think the best way to find out if something like that is possible is to consult your local department where you finished your BSc, the people with expertise as close as possible to your future project, who will be able to judge if this makes a valid and potentially fruitful research plan. If yes, then I do not think you will have big problems admitted to the PhD program.

As a side note, observe that you might be asked to deal with some Master level courses/exams etc which, if you work full time, and depending how difficult is your department, will not be a piece of cake.


Should I not apply to a PhD program when a Potential Advisor gives me a generic response? I have been sending emails to potential advisors for PhD programs, and the responses have varied from, You have an impressive CV, and I strongly encourage you to apply, to lets discuss future projects over skype.

The "lets discuss projects over skype" is a no brainer. But the "impressive CV" response seems a bit generic, and am wondering if he wants me to apply just to have more applications? So finally, I have these questions:

If you are a potential PhD advisor, what kind of responses do you give students that you MOST want to apply to the program? Do you ever say, please don't apply here? Does this vary depending on the ranking of the institution? I tend to get the generic ones from higher ranked programs and the more personal ones from lower ranked programs.

Also, For people who have applied to Phd programs, What kinds of responses did you get and what was the outcome of your application there?

The primary motivation for this question is because there are many departments I wish to apply to, but realize applying to 20 programs would take up too much time.

Anyway, thanks for taking a look at my questions.

In managing responses, you should keep in mind the policies and procedures of respective departments. For instance, in my field, projects aren't discussed until after a student's been admitted, and the decision regarding advisors isn't made until after students enroll. So there's little productive reason for an advisor to discuss projects with prospective students, given the enormous time between the conversation, and when the student would start working.

In addition, keep in mind that professors are busy professionals, and have lots of demands on their time. For instance, the professor you've written to might be on travel, or have some ongoing commitments that preclude a longer answer.

Now, on the other hand, if you're submitting to an individual PhD position, and the professor will hire you "directly," then a generic response isn't so good, unless there's an indication that the professor would like to discuss things further.

Finally, how generic a person's response will be will also depend on how generic or specific your initial inquiry is. If someone "cold calls" me, and "greets" me with "Dear Sir" or "Hello," and doesn't show any signs of explaining why I should consider hiring that individual, I am unlikely to respond at all, because why should I write a personal response to a form letter?


Why call it a "major" revision if the suggested changes are seemingly minor? I recently got a major revision from an applied math journal. However the only change the reviewer has asked is to put a remark on some theorem in the paper (why the specified theorem will not work under some general case). According to the reviewers the rest of the paper is fine.

I am slightly confused why is it a "major revision". Any suggestion will be helpful.

It varies by journal I'm sure but sometimes the line between "minor" and "major" revision is set by whether the reviewers wish to see the changes authors make in response to their comments before recommending acceptance.

A "minor" revision would go straight back to the editor and then to production while a "major" one goes back to the reviewers first. This might not be related to the amount of work required.

In your case it's possible that the reviewer wants to be sure you include an appropriate section about the limitations of the algorithm otherwise they wouldn't recommend acceptance.


PhD student where TA work leaves little time for PhD. Is it even worth it to finish this PhD? Background: I started a PhD in a CS-oriented field about 8 months ago, after completing my masters. At the very start, I was given a lot of duties besides my PhD project, such as responsibility for several of our servers, various software and hardware, user accounts, etc. I also serve as a TA to different courses every semester. After all that, I estimate that in terms of time, 15% of the working week is maybe left for research work. In my project I work alone (this is nice), but my project as well is more ambitious than that of other people, as already confirmed by my advisor and colleagues.

Problem: I started a PhD with the hopes to research an issue at depth and gain expertise in that field, now I find I don't actually have time to seriously devote myself to research activity. I was apparently hired to be some kind of an "assistant", but not one that should be called "research assistant". On top of all, I'm paid much lower than what I could earn out in the open, or what I should be paid given the amount of hours extra I put in. I am really demotivated because I entered the PhD with different intentions. FYI, I have no desire to continue in academia as a career, neither do I need the "Dr." title to be more marketable or for ego purposes or whatever - the only reason was fun of the kind I get very little.

Question: I can't decide if it's worth it to stay, I also don't want to be spoiled and foolish. I won't take your word as command, but would be nice to just get honest 3rd party opinions, or sharing if you're dealing with the same situation.

EDIT: thanks all for sharing thoughts and giving some advice. I marked as "answer" the comment with the most subcomments. I already talked to other PhD students and it seems most don't have it as tough as me. I guess with all these tasks eventually the quality of my research will suffer, and I will talk to my advisor about this particular point, as I believe this should be a concern for him as well.

Everyone in academic CS gets below market pay. It sounds like they made you a department IT guy, and I've never heard of that, but it may not be too unusual.

You might be burned out, they overwork you. You can:

1) talk to your advisor about all this. Maybe they can lighten the load. TAing and being an assistant sounds like too much.

2) take some time off. Go into industry for a year. It sounds like you want to do that anyway. Departments have a process for being on-leave. Make some money, get a hobby, don't think about your research for at least three months. Then decide if you want to go back and finish your PhD.


If you have no choice, is it acceptable to translate a recommendation letter for yourself? Inspired by the question Is it acceptable to write a reference letter for yourself?

I have a related but somewhat different question: Given no choice, is it acceptable to write a recommendation letter for self?

This question is based on real cases. In non-English speaking countries, many professors don't know how to write good recommendation letters in English. The professor may know how to write papers in English in his field. But, when writing recommendation letters, he has limited vocabulary to write about his students. In other words, his English is not proficient. To make the matter worse, some professors may only be able to  write simple English sentences. The professor may tell the student the contents of the letter in his native language and ask the student to translate it into English and then signs it.

The student may want somebody else to write the letter because he does not want the professor to do this unethical thing. But, the professor just happens to be his advisor (undergraduate or master). The student may want to suggest that his professor ask the professor's colleagues for help to write the letter. The professor may say no. Therefore, the student writes the recommendation letter for himself by translating the professor's draft in their native language into English.

Is it acceptable? If not, what should the student do?

Thanks for asking this question.

In light of recent strong comments I have made on closely related issues elsewhere, let me say that I think that getting a letter translated from one language to another is an absolutely kosher academic practice.  The classy thing to do would be to also include the original (e.g. how do you know that the readers will not speak that language?) and also indicate who the translator was.

However, the translator should not be the student.  That is a problem because:

(i) It is an obvious conflict of interest.
(ii) Recommendation letters are often meant to be confidential, and this violates confidentiality.

If you absolutely cannot get anyone other than the student to translate the letter then you should clearly indicate "translated by the student" and expect to have your honesty applauded and the letter largely dismissed.

I must say that my heart opens up for a student who is living in a context where there is no qualified third party to translate a letter into English.  I have been to academic departments in several non-anglophone countries and never encountered such a situation...but of course I have not been everywhere, nor to a random sampling, nor to any academic department in a "third world" country.  That's a tough situation.  Translating the letter yourself does not seem like the best answer.

Let me also say the following: if you are a non-anglophone student whose English skills are far superior to those of the faculty at your university [and assuming that you are applying to anglophone graduate programs, of course!], then you might try to cultivate relationships with anglophone professors elsewhere in the world.  Twenty years ago that would have been preposterous advice, but due to the proliferation of mathematical interaction via the internet, it seems very viable today.  For instance there is a small but positive number of students with whom I have had sufficiently substantial interaction on MathOverflow and (more often) math.SE so that I would be glad to write them a strong recommendation letter.   If you are a math student, you can always try writing to any professor and having mathematical interactions with them.  They are not obligated to respond (I certainly do not always respond...), but they often do (I often do...) especially if you show them something truly promising.

[At some point in the previous paragraph I forgot that I was supposed to be writing for a general academic audience rather than an academic mathematical audience.  But since I am not sure how far my advice extends outside of mathematics, I will leave the m-word in.]

Among US students applying to US graduate programs, it is increasingly frequent for at least one of three recommendation letters to come from the director of a summer undergraduate research experience (REU) than a faculty member at the university.  Such letters are not necessarily the most penetrating -- they read very similarly, perhaps because of the implicit motivation to paint one's summer research experience in a positive light -- but they often get the job done, i.e., they lead to admissions.

Let me also say that a letter of recommendation for graduate admission is not always the most important part of the application.  If I get an application from a university that I have not heard of, and letters from faculty that I have not heard of and whose reputations I do not know, I can only take the letters so seriously no matter what they say.  (And it is quite true that not everyone knows how to write a good "American-style recommendation letter".  This does not necessarily get counted against the student; it just doesn't get counted for them.)  If you are coming from an "obscure program" then your goal is to convince the readers of the applications that your training is equal to (or superior than!) the training that students in more familiar programs get.  So it can be helpful to include very specific information about coursework: e.g. not just the title of the course and the course grade but the textbooks used.  If you wrote a paper which does not make any research contribution but shows a solid understanding of graduate-level material, by all means include that as part of the application.  Also be sure to take all the applicable standardized tests and do your best on them (and don't cheat on them!!).


Status and selectivity of open access journals I am wondering about the following (after reading this question that discusses open access journals):

Is it easier to publish in one of the open access journals (when compared to the traditional journals)?
Does publishing in one of the open access journals affect the academic value of an article? (Unsure how to put this, but I mean does it affect your reputation etc?)

I note that some of the open access journals are peer-reviewed.

An example of open access is the Directory of Open Access Journals.

Open access vs. closed access is a totally separate issue from quality of journal.  There are high quality open access journals and low quality ones, and high quality traditional journals and low quality ones.  There may be some correlation because open access journals tend to be newer and so less established, but nonetheless if you want to determine the quality of a particular journal you should look at that specific journal not try to extrapolate based on whether it's open access or not.


Reject a paper based on relevant but pointless research direction Disclaimer: this is a hypothetical question, not (immediately) related to any concrete past, present or future reviewed paper.
My context is the no-fly zone between Computer Science and Applied Mathematics. In my opinion, there are some research directions within this field that are pointless. Roughly speaking, papers can be either theoretical or applicative. The former provide insight on formal concepts, model interesting physical phenomena, analyze significant properties of an algorithm, and so on. The latter build algorithms to solve real-world applications, or at least provide preliminary results on contrived problems that promise future performance enhancements. In summary, I am very tolerant as to which is my field of research, and I find interesting results almost everywhere.
However, I observe that there appear more and more papers that suffer from the syndrome of the "parameter change": a model—typically an algorithm—is built that can solve toy problems, but no large-scale application is proved or foreseen; there are no fundamental theoretical problems in either Mathematics or Computer Science (or Physics, Biology, or other fields) involved; then, a second paper changes a minor parameter or adds a light generalization, but still no real applicability is shown; then a third paper. Note that I am not talking about marginal papers, I estimate that half the papers of a top journal (ISI indexed, impact factor, serious publisher...) fall within this description.
Now, my particular problem: I am assigned a paper for review. I am a bit prejudiced by the title and the abstract, but nonetheless I bite the bullet and go through pages and pages of equations, crowned by some computer simulations that allegedly prove the superiority of the algorithm (marginal superiority in an uninteresting toy problem). I am unable to point out any particular error, which is hardly surprising, since what is proved is rather obvious, usually some disguised version of the Stone-Weierstrass theorem or the Lyapunov Stability criterion.
What do you think should be my stance? Some possibilities:

Next time, think better and decline the review because you are prejudiced and unable to produce a fair review.

Well, the paper is correct, isn't it? Judge exclusively by the content.

The editor has asked for your opinion and you think that the paper should not be published. Say so: "It is correct but this line of research is pointless. Yes, I know that there are hundreds of papers within this line, but those are not my business and I am currently reviewing this paper".

What about consequences of the somewhat quixotic answer 3? It looks like my opinion is minority and probably not shared with editors themselves. Could I be berated or blacklisted by the editor?

Generally, as a reviewer, you are being asked for your opinion of the paper's correctness and its significance (importance, level of interest, etc).  Evidently in this case you think the results are not significant or interesting enough to publish in this journal, so you should say so in your review.  If possible, you should explain why you think so: the authors don't give any compelling applications, the results are only a marginal improvement on what's known, etc.

This isn't reason to decline the review.  Thinking the paper is uninteresting isn't "prejudice".

If the editors don't agree with your assessment, they are free to disregard it and publish the paper anyway.  But you do have a responsibility to give your honest opinion.

In fact, I would suggest that you evaluate the paper's interest before you start to carefully check its correctness.  If you believe it's not significant enough to publish, even if correct, then you can so inform the editors and save yourself the time.

There are some exceptions, where the editors may only be interested in whether you believe the paper is correct.  Perhaps they are already convinced it is sufficiently important (from their own opinions or other reviewers), or perhaps "importance" isn't a criterion for publication in this journal (e.g. PLOS One).  If that's the case, then the review invitation should make this clear; otherwise, do consider the paper's importance as part of your review.


Do I need to search citation sources for a rather generic graphic that I have drawn myself? I'm about to write up my PhD thesis at the moment and for the theoretical part I have drawn some graphics that are of rather generic type -- crystal structures, crystal lattices and the like, similar to the image below (taken from Wikipedia, just as an example):

This type of image is very well-known in my field and can be found in every type of book about crystallography looking more or less the same. Also I am  100% sure that I have seen any of the features, that I have included in my own graphics, already in other publications, albeit maybe not all in one single graphic. Most of the graphics' properties, such as the atom positions and all the properties derived thereof, are commonly known facts, so only the style of the graphics may be something unique to a special graphic.

As I have seen them so often and worked with them for some years now, I can draw them out of memory without looking them up. Also I draw them with the features that I need to show my point. Therefore it might happen that I am  reproducing someone else's graphics without being aware of it. As the question arose in the comments, in conclusion I draw graphics whose base structure is given by commonly known data using widely employed ways to draw such graphics, which contains the danger that someone could have drawn the same or a very similar graphic before.

Would this be OK or should I dig into literature to find if there are sources that could have been the inspiration for my own graphics?

If you create an image yourself that is not modeled after/derived from someone else's, you don't have to go out of your way to learn if someone has created a similar image.

For example, if I create a flow diagram of a common process for my paper, it's likely that many other papers have a similar diagram (because the technique of using flow diagrams to illustrate a process is pretty standard). That's perfectly OK as long as I didn't intentionally copy them.

(As always: if the technique of visualization or the data content of the image is not general knowledge, cite it.)


Personal qualities required for a career in academia? I am looking to apply for research programmes after I complete my undergraduate degree. While I thoroughly enjoy research, I'm worried about whether this is the best field for me to pursue.

What qualities would one say are necessary to become a researcher - which of these are innate and which can be learned?

What are the things one should know about a career in academia?

Required is a very strong word. There are a wide variety of people in academia, generally believed to be a good thing.

But some things are valued and more useful:

A love of ideas is usually preeminent. If you don't value ideas over money or status or material things, then you would probably be frustrated in academia.

An ability to think long term, rather than short. This is especially true in research fields, where results may take a long time to mature, or even to originate. Likewise a minimal, at least, tolerance for frustration when things don't go as planned in a research program.

Some minimal comfort in dealing with people in a cooperative way. Some, of course, can do without this, but collaboration is pretty highly valued today. But those with conditions such as autism can also do well, provided that they can learn to work with others effectively, even if not comfortably.

A work ethic that you can sustain. Reading, Reading, Reading. Making notes. Discussions with colleagues about ill-formed ideas. Long hours. Irregular hours. Dealing with interruptions.

Speaking ability is a big plus, and for many it needs to be learned as it may not come naturally. Along with it is an ability to organize ideas so that others can grasp what we want to convey.

Sensitivity for the fact that others, especially students, probably aren't like you and don't learn in the same way that you do. Undergraduate students, especially, are often less engaged and especially less engaged in the ideas you feel are most important. So, patience.

An ability to accept setbacks without losing hope or direction. Research often doesn't pan out. If it always did, it wouldn't be research. And then flexibility in finding new ways to truth when the ones you tried are failing.

In many fields, an ability to value nuance and the fact that others hold contrary opinions just as strongly as you do and the fact that the truth may fall outside your strongly held opinions. This is less needed, of course, in fields like mathematics where the standards of truth are clear. Philosophy, Literary Criticism, ... Nuance rules.

(Stopping for now. Some other ideas may induce me to extend this.)


Is it possible to do a Postdoc without travelling? I am soon to finish my PhD and would love to do postdoctoral research (UK). However, for reasons I shan't go into, it is not viable for me to travel outside of my city and so I am unable to attend conferences/workshops/etc.

Is it feasible for me to obtain a postdoc position? Or do postdoc responsibilities necessarily entail travelling?

This is somewhat field dependent, but your academic career could be much more challenging if your disability or other circumstances prevent you from traveling. You may need to travel to job interviews at the very least. Not attending conferences to present your research will reduce the visibility of your work, and so you will struggle to get your ideas well known in your field. This could reduce your job prospects. You will need to have your research products well-advertised on the web in order to have any name recognition. Your research may also have to be more ground-breaking in order to garner recognition.

If, for example, you work in Computer Science, conference publications are typically the most prestigious, so the inability to travel to present your work may mean that it is not published.

I don't mean to be too discouraging, but I think you should reevaluate whether or not you can make 1 or 2 trips per year in order to present your work. It may do wonders for how hard your career is otherwise.

On the plus side, you might also try talking to some conference organizers before you submit your work about presenting your results via video conference. I was at a workshop this week where a presenter couldn't make it due to a last-minute problem with his flight, and he gave a great presentation via Google Hangouts. He wasn't there to network, but at least his presentation happened. If your reasons for not traveling are due to disability (including mental disabilities like social anxiety, agoraphobia, etc.), the country where the conference happens may require that they try to accommodate your needs.


Work on a conditional accepted paper for a 4 stars journal not even mentioned on the acknowledgements A while ago I got involved in a project with my current PhD supervisor that consisted on coding about 120 papers for a Meta-Analysis that took a considerable amount of time. Due to the fact that the paper was conditionally accepted, I was told that I would appear in the acknowledgements as a contributor. However, when the paper got finally published, there were no acknowledgements mentioning my name. I raised this issue to my supervisor by email and answered with "I did not realize" but did not even add an apology for the lack of recognition. What can I do to get recognition for my work?

I think you overestimate the value of being listed in the acknowledgements, which is not to say that an apology was not in order (but this is not worth pressing about).  However, there are almost no tangible ways in which being listed in an acknowledgements section of a paper will help you professionally.  The most it will do for you is that your name gets seen a couple of times, which may remind/inform a reader of your existence as a human being.

The ways that you get recognized for work which either does not get published or you do not get co-authorship are:

Appreciation by other researchers who personally know what you did (e.g., your professor).  Consequently they may be more motivated to bring you in on projects in the future, which you might get coauthorship for or at least be in a good position to get a strong letter of recommendations.
(less direct) You gain experience and knowledge from this work, and it may be that you will have an opportunity to share your newfound wisdom with someone in the future, who may be impressed.


Deciding about publication venue with Advisor I have been working on a paper as the first author. The paper looks good to my advisor and other collaborators, and we are almost ready to submit. I have already submitted the abstract for a good conference, and the full-paper is due in a few days. In the past week, my advisor let me know about a special edition of a reasonably good journal, that is due in a few weeks time (special edition = faster publication time. Period).

My advisor first asked my opinion about the venue choice, and I gave +s and -s of both, but refrained from providing a clear choice, saying that my experience in publishing is limited. In my mind, the +s of conference will be opportunity to travel and interact with community at large. Also I have never been to a conference before, so was excited about it. But I realize that the paper is a dead-end of sort, and doesn't have much scope to expand and publish later in a journal (Researchers in our field are usually interested to expand conf. papers into journal). Ultimately both me and my advisor agree that "getting it published" is the end goal that both of us would be happy to see.

I wonder if I should intervene and provide a strong opinion? or just let my advisor take the call? I have seen my advisor being pretty good at making such decisions. and I want to avoid looking like a jerk, when I have a long way as a PhD student with him.

I would like to thank Everyone for their suggestions. Things played out a bit differently than I would have anticipated. I talked to my advisor a day before the submission that I would like to submit for this conference, since my coauthor (ex-postdoc, 2nd author, experienced) recommended that's its a good venue and there will be scope to expand the paper into a journal later with xyz extensions. I had already discussed those extensions with my advisor before, but maybe i didn't sound as prepared / convinced. After our conversation, my advisor gave another quick review on the paper and let me submit it. Luckily it got accepted and I will be traveling to present it :). In retrospect, I feel my advisor was waiting for me to have a constructive discussion before giving me a go-ahead. I wasn't being as proactive earlier, was just too busy working on the paper and following up with coauthors.

To be honest, I don't see a problem here.  You seem to have a very good relationship with your advisor, who both repeatedly asks for your input and gives you the benefit of his expertise and experience.  You have weighed in helpfully on the question at hand, but not definitively, because you don't yet have a definitive opinion.

The part where I get a bit confused is where you wonder whether you should "intervene" even though (i) you trust your advisor to make good decisions and (ii) you don't yet have a clear opinion to intervene with.  So...unless/until you acquire a strong opinion of your own, go with what your advisor suggests.  If/when you do, talk to him about it.  If the decision has already been made and then you have thoughts about it, you can still talk to your advisor about it, but you should frame it not as questioning the decision but rather as a learning experience for you.

I think you're good.


Choosing between primary advisors for a PhD program I currently work as a research assistant for Prof. A on a government funded project which ends this year. I have advised Prof. A that I am interested in pursuing a PhD and that I would like to stay at the institute I am currently at and to potentially complete it with them as well.

My job has ended up being that I do the bulk of my experimental work in Prof. B's group, as they have the necessary tools and expertise to answer the questions we have and I have established a healthy collaboration. As Prof. B's group is more focussed on work closely pertaining to mine, I find myself more engaged in meetings and conversations of the subject matter with this group than of my own with Prof. A.

Prof B. has since offered me to be a PhD student in their group next year, quite insistently, with 60% primary supervision to Prof. B and 40% supervision to Prof. A. Understandably, Prof. A would prefer it be the other way around.

I enjoy working for Prof. A a lot, but can also see working for Prof. B being highly rewarding albeit a little bit tougher on the expectation and 'cracking the whip' front. Both would offer me an excellent PhD opportunity, but with two very distinct outcomes and professional training. I'm a little stuck on how to decide between them.

Is it a better option for me to have Prof. B as my primary supervisor given that's where my professional goals lie, or is it more important to work for someone that I am much more comfortable with and have extensive prior experience with such as Prof. A?

This paper asks about postdocs, but I suspect the conclusions would be the same:
https://f1000research.com/articles/6-1642/v2

After surveying Postdocs, they find that the only singificant predictor of life satisfaction is having how collegial atmosphere in the lab is.

Thus I'd say pick the supervisor who's group you feel most at home in. Your PhD will inevitably suck at many times, and the only people who will really understand what you are going through are those in your group. Make sure they are people you can trust and who will be there for you.


Planning to do PHD, Masters Thesis important? (USA) I am a master's student in computer science. I have completed my coursework and will be graduating soon, with a project. I am planning to do a PhD in the future: is a master's thesis an important prerequisite for a PhD? Most people say yes, hence I am of two minds: (1) get an extension and improve my project into thesis, and then graduate or (2) graduate now, hoping that everything will work out fine. I already expressed my interest to work more on my project; my advisor said OK. Do I need to do anything other than this (improving my project, of course with research exploration) to get a thesis? My advisor seems to be a little uninterested, because he has to guide other students, too, rather than that I did a bad job on the project. But I am wondering which way to go: industry or master's thesis?

Your last question is a bit of a non sequitur, frankly: I don't really see the connection between going into industry versus doing a master's thesis with the rest of the question.

That said, JeffE's comment above is essentially correct: if you are interested in doing a PhD in the near future, an industrial job is probably not going to get you the research experience you need to be a competitive PhD applicant.

With respect to what you need to do to convert your project into a master's thesis, that's really something you ought to discuss with your project supervisor. Without knowing the specific policies of your department, as well as the specifics of what you did in the project, it's difficult (if not impossible) for us to know what needs to be done.


Can I use a graph or figures of a paywalled paper under fair use? I am writing a blog post citing several paywalled papers. Could I also put graphs, diagrams or photos from these papers in my blog post under fair use?

My field is medical object detection and I would like to show examples from the papers where the authors show in which cases their algorithms fail.

Whether the articles were paywalled or not, you should resolve your problem in three steps:

Content license: check if you can find a version of the figure with liberal licensing terms. The paywalled version certainly does not fit the bill… but you may find the same figure (or a similar one) in a pre-print version of the paper, under a different license.

Obtaining permission for use: even if the content is not available under a free license, the publisher can grant you permission to reproduce the image. Nowadays, many publishers use a nice interface called Rightslink. If you look for example at this random article from the American Chemical Society (which is far from being the most liberal of publishers), you can see a “Rights and permissions” link. In that particular example, the publisher will grant you reproducing of up to 4 figures of the paper on the internet, even on a for-profit website.

Fair use: the fair use doctrine is a tricky, murky area of US copyright law. It's not as wide as people generally assume. It has to be judged on a case-by-case basis: see here and there. See here a notorious case from back in 2007 which is very close to your particular case.
So, my own conclusion on fair use: it's nice in principle, but unless you're ready to hire a lawyer to double-check (or get formal training on that), just play it safe.