Help me understand plagiarism concerning computer programming My question revolves around "understanding of plagiarism concepts in and around the gray area of academic programming"

Suppose there is an assignment "A" which asks for a distributed application , say from .net . There are at max "2 correct solutions" for every task. so a student "A" decides to help is class-mate and the other student "understands" the solution and implement the same , Does it count as plagiarism or tutoring . Student B does NOT write in his submission that student A helped him.

Suppose student A does not know how to code in a particular "language".He deduces the logical steps required for the code (himself). he discusses these steps with a "person who is good at coding". the person tells him the libraries to use and discussions(no coding) . He does all that and takes his help for "debug" "when he got stuck" and writes in his own words but did not mention the NAME of this friend who helped him.

Is all well here?

As mentioned in my comment, this does not seem like plagiarism (as described here) - as no written material has been copied between the students.

Specifically:

  student "A" decides to help is class-mate and the other student "understands" the solution and implement the same

Student A tutored the other student. At the very most, student A could have been acknowledged, but really is not necessary.

  he discusses these steps with a "person who is good at coding". the person tells him the libraries to use and discussions(no coding) . He does all that and takes his help for "debug" "when he got stuck" and WRITES IN HIS OWN WORDS

This is also really tutoring.

Both are rather nice examples of sharing knowledge and skills.

It is probably a case that the students helping out did so because they are just simply happy to help.

One major thing to consider, these examples show classmates collaborating - drawing on each other's strengths. Each person in those interactions already benefit.  This is also touches on a transferable skill - collaborative work.

But whether or not the level of collaboration is within the rules there is another matter (but really should be checked).

Not everything needs to result in a person's name in lights. These are not really examples of plagiarism, but to be absolutely certain, it would not hurt to read up on the institution's plagiarism policies.


Should I use a pen name or pseudonym on my papers as a form of semi-anonymity? This question is very nearly a duplicate to "Taking an academic pseudonym?", however, my name is already sufficiently unique, and I am wondering if it makes sense to use a pseudonym even if I don't need to? (Perhaps this is too subjective for stackexchange...)

I have a (potentially unfounded and/or irrational) fear of publishing on my official name, which is also the name I use in social situations. This is partly since I am at-present "un-Google-able" and I'd very much like to stay that way. I'm thinking about this a lot now since I am soon going to publish my first paper, and I know that it's important to have a consistent academic identity.

Suppose my full name is "Sheldon Lee Cooper", and I normally go by "Sheldon Cooper". I've been thinking I could publish under "Lee Cooper", and then Googling "Sheldon Cooper" would still return no results. I'd use "Lee Cooper" on my academic webpage too, and I would ask to submit my PhD under this name also.

Alternatively I could publish under "Sheldon Lee". (As in this answer.)

This is like Tony Hoare, who's full name is Charles Antony Richard Hoare. Note that Googling "Charles Hoare" gives very different search results.

My academic research is focused on a niche area of (pure) mathematics, so am I being irrational in wanting to remain somewhat anonymous on the internet? Should I acknowledge that publishing niche mathematics is unlikely to harm my reputation and just publish under my legal name as-is? Or does it makes sense to publish under my middle and last name, or even an entirely unique pseudonym? What are the advantages and disadvantages either way?

Some related questions I've seen on academia.stackexchange include:

Pen name similar with real name: Zu Yangzu instead of Zu Yang for papers
This is about having a unique name. My name is sufficiently unique in either variation.

Is it possible to be known in academia by a different name?
Short answer: Yes.

If I publish under a pseudonym, can I still take credit for my work?
Short answer: Probably yes, though not fully anonymous in that case. This will become your academic identity.

Separating academic identity from social identity
My scenario differers in that I currently have no Google results, and if I publish under my own name then that will become my Google results. If I take up publishing erotic novels then I am in a position to do that under a pen name that doesn't conflict. So I don't already have a different identity conflicting, as the author of this question does.

Choosing my name as an author when publishing a scientific paper, can I use my “unofficial” first name?

What are reasonable alternatives to changing your name for academic publishing when you have a common surname?

Taking an academic pseudonym?
This is very similar to my question, the key difference being that the author has the motivation of avoiding confusion with other people who have a similar name. My only motivation is fear of being Googled easily (in a non-academic context). Is that fear irrational?

So your question is "am I being irrational in wanting to remain somewhat anonymous on the internet?" The answer is that in the end it is your trade-off. There is benefit to keeping private and professional live separate, but I have been able to so to my satisfaction while not hiding from Google & Co. To me the effort I would have had to put into this (for me it is too late now) was not worth the benefit, but preferences differ between individuals.

When you make this decision try to get an idea of what kind of effort you will have to maintain in order to maintain your online cover and what the potential downsides are if people find it hard to find you. Also try to get a list of all the bad things that can happen if your cover is blown, i.e. what horrible things will happen if Google knows who you are. If you have those two list you can decide for yourself if the benefits outweigh the costs.


Can you increase your undergrad gpa after graduating? I've googled this question a few times and I've seen multiple different answers. I read that you can raise your undergrad gpa using a post bacc and I also read that post baccs provide a separate gpa. So, I'd really appreciate if I could get a definitive answer, preferably with a source. Thank you.

Yes, it is possible.

Faculty at my university have the right to change their course grades up to five years after the course ends.  I have a standing offer that if any student publishes a research paper as a result of work in my class, I will retroactively change their grade in that class to an A+.  I have actually done this a few times, in one case two full years after the course ended.

(All the students involved in those changes already had A's, and my university counts both A and A+ as 4.0 in its GPA calculations, so the change did not actually change their GPA.  But in principle, it could have.)

But this is the only way I can imagine a student at my university changing their GPA after graduating.  In particular, I believe the university maintains separate GPAs for different degree programs, so taking any post-bacc or graduate courses would not effect their bachelor GPA.


Favoring citations in the same journal I have once, some time ago, received a rejection notice in which the journal editor made what I thought was a peculiar comment. The reviewers all found that the work was good, but one emitted a doubt that I had chosen the right journal for it, saying the paper might not appeal to the broad readership of the journal (it was a general physics journal). So far, nothing out of the ordinary.

However, the editor indicated that his judgment to reject the paper was based on the fact that very few of the citations in the manuscript actually referred to the journal I had submitted it to. (Like, 2 citations out of 35. Some of the other citations were to other general physics journals, some to more specific journals.)

Back then, this looked very weird to me. To some extent, it could be interpreted as a push by the editor to increase self-citation of his journal. It has never occurred to me since.

Is it common practice? When does it become ethically wrong?

It is not unheard of. For a journal that I submit regularly to the instructions for authors state

  Given that the Journal has been in existence for over 80 years and has
  published of the order of 35,000 papers on a wide variety of
  acoustical topics over its lifetime, the absence of any references to
  previously published papers in the Journal raises a flag signaling the
  possibility that the paper lies outside the de facto scope of the
  Journal

I think it really is a scope question and not a self citation question. That said, the handling editors of this journal often alert authors during the later stages of review of potentially relevant in press publications within the journal. Most have been relevant and I am happy to add the sentence or two to the background, but I also think of it as a clear attempt at increasing self citation counts.


Why might only some papers from a conference be included in Google Scholar? Why some publications are not included in Google Scholar, while some are, for the same conference?

For example, there are a number of papers on Black Hat:

https://www.blackhat.com/docs/us-15/materials/us-15-Arnaboldi-Abusing-XSLT-For-Practical-Attacks-wp.pdf

https://www.blackhat.com/docs/us-15/materials/us-15-Evenchick-Breaking-Access-Controls-With-BLEKey-wp.pdf

But when you search for them, like "Abusing XSLT for Practical Attacks" on Google Scholar, there is no result.
They are papers in 2015, it has been one year since then.

Also, they meet the Google Scholar's inclusion requirement:
https://scholar.google.com/intl/en/scholar/inclusion.html

However, for some other papers in the same conference (Black Hat USA 2015), they are included in Google Scholar.

So what are the real standards for publications to be included and searchable in Google Scholar?

Doing a little bit of poking around, I found most articles on BlackHat 2015 not listed in Google Scholar, and all of the articles that I did find listed were cited by other papers.

It seems to me then likely that this is among the "grey area" sites that Google Scholar is not indexing (BlackHat's status as an academic conference is murky), and thus that any material that you find is being added to the Google Scholar index through other routes.


Authorship for papers not completed before leaving, where I am major contributor? I am a senior freelance software engineer, with about 10 years' experience. I've been working in a university setting for the past year, as a contractor. Usually I work in a commercial environment.

During the year, I've done 15-20 days' work on each of 2 different projects that should have turned into papers, but didn't due to lack of time from the PI. These projects are more or less complete from a coding point of view: they just haven't been written up by the PI. I believe the time required to write up should be 2-4 days each.

I've now decided to move on from the team (partly due to frustration at projects like these being blocked, which means I don't have much visible output) and am documenting and handing over my projects.

My question is this. On these projects, is it reasonable to ask for authorship on any paper that is written based on my work after I leave? And - assuming that my estimate of 2-4 days' work remaining above is correct - is it reasonable to ask for first authorship? (Our field is epidemiology / life sciences, so I believe that authorship order reflects overall contribution.)

We weren't doing traditional scientific experiments - these are data-driven research projects. So the hierarchy is probably more like the wider digital world, in which execution is generally acknowledged to be more important than ideas. Specifically, my code would have collected the data; my coding decisions would have driven 95% of the design; and I would have written an iPython notebook forming the basis of the methods and results sections of the paper. The PI would write the intro and conclusions and pull together the paper. For example, one project was to do comparison of datasets in the scientific literature, and the PI's idea was pretty much "hey, let's look at dataset A, see if we could match it with dataset B, and draw some conclusions". My contribution was to see if that was possible, learn about datasets C and D and E and F, decide F was the best match, do the actual matching of A and F, and draw the conclusions. The PI will literally just write up the conclusions.

In both cases the original idea was the PI's, and they have provided guidance as I worked, but probably not more than 0.5-1 day in total.

I'm not sure how authorship works after I've left. The ICMJE's author definition says that authors should be involved in drafting and approving the paper, but I won't be involved in that (well, unless I work for free).

However, it's very important for my commercial reputation that I can point to visible work done during the year, so I would like to be named as an author, rather than all the work just vanishing under the PI's name.

One other point: the PI previously put me down as second author on a project where I'd done 99% of the work, and when I queried this, claimed there was no convention on authorship order in our field. Fortunately, I was able to resolve this amicably. But given that experience, I'm now keen to clarify the position about authorship before I leave, and I'd welcome advice on convention and etiquette in this situation.

If you only did programming support for a project, and did not design or collect data, or design the experiment, and did not have a role in writing the manuscript, you probably qualify for only an acknowledgement, and not full authorship. I'm not clear what you mean by "feasibility research" - it's possible that work would qualify if it went beyond normal software design processes (i.e., are you determining whether the idea was feasible for YOU to accomplish in a certain time frame, or feasible at all, and what was the extent of other approaches that you considered...given the time frame you state of 15-20 days work, I am very skeptical there was extensive feasibility research necessary).

15-20 days work is a miniscule amount of time for a typical scientific publication - I would say the normal range is 6 months to 2 years. This range counts all of the failures and false starts inherent in science, refining ideas, etc. Though it is possible all of the data and analysis that goes into a paper takes place on a shorter time frame, it is unfair to exclude all of the productive failure along the way.

Programming by itself isn't really a direct contribution to a scientific project, regardless of the time spent, unless you are developing algorithms, or doing something novel (for example, optimizing a program to the extent that a previously computationally intractable question can be solved in a reasonable timeframe).

I doubt your PI actually does not know the conventions of authorship in the field; it seems more likely that they knew you were overestimating your role in the project, gave you the appropriate credit, and didn't want to argue with you over it further.

More generally, and not speaking to your situation specifically, leaving a lab should not affect your claim to authorship on any work you did while you were a member. However, meeting all the requirements for authorship will indeed require further, unpaid work. At a minimum, this would include review of the manuscript before submission and publication, and in most cases would include substantial writing/editing support, preparation of final figures, etc.


How to keep discussions with supervisor on interest? I am a Master's student. I have one problem. I have regular meetings with my research supervisor, but during the discussions he takes me in the wrong direction. This often leads to him coming to the wrong conclusions about my work.

For example, he will read half of a statement and try to conclude something (wrong) from that half statement. I try to correct him but he doesn't listen. So far I have not seen any benefits for my research. How can I deal with this situtation? I know it is research and some times we need to go in the wrong direction.

This is a partial strategy, but I realized it's more an answer than a comment. I'm sure others will have very useful strategies for this all-too-common problem.

You could phrase it as "yes, and..." rather than correcting. "Yes, that's an interesting angle: I thought about that too and then I realized X. So then I [details getting back on track.]" Not saying it'll work, but this may be a way to bring him back with you into the active part of the problem-solving space.

Also, if you can have a one page overview/agenda that previews the path you've taken, that might be easier to get him to follow along with and prevent misconceptions. Also, perhaps have two or three clear questions written at the bottom of the one-page agenda, so he gets a chance to weigh in on something new, and you get a chance to get his clear feedback on something you need to know. (Then email an update with a revised agenda attached, with "Thanks for talking about this! I've added my notes about what we talked about today, for reference.")


I've received interview for faculty position at one school but am interested in another school I've just sent out job applications last week and only a few days later received a phone call for a phone interview at one school. I am interested in another school that the chair of that school is on my doctoral dissertation committee.
I've expressed my interest in a faculty position to him after he asked me if I would be interested. Since then, I haven't heard from him and my communication with him has been only about my dissertation. He provided me with a lot of compliments on my work and said directly that he is impressed by the amount and speed of work that I get done. However, I still didn't hear from him a call for interview or further discussion about the faculty position. Now that I am called for interviews, what shall I do?

Should I let him know that I have interviews. if I do he probably going to ask me which schools?.

He is probably trying to be professional and separate you as a student and you as an applicant. I wouldn't bring it up to him. You clearly already have a leg up since he told you about the position in the first place. He also probably already knows that you are applying to other places (since people generally apply for jobs before graduation).


Is it appropriate to ask for a pay raise as an adjunct professor with a Master's degree? I am currently a Ph.D. student with a Master's degree. Throughout my time in grad school, I have been an adjunct at a local university. Recently, this university has started a Master's program in my field. However, the department is quite small and those faculty who are able/interested in teaching these classes is even smaller thus, I have been asked if I would like to teach one of the graduate classes for this new program.

My question is whether or not it would be appropriate for me to ask for a pay increase to teach this course. Currently the adjunct pay is determined by a per unit rate depending on level of education (in my case Master's). What I am unsure about is if this rate should change, or if it is common in other institutions for pay to increase when teaching grad level courses.

There are myriad factors that go into pay rates, but the bottom line with this or any job is your pay should reflect what you bring to the table.  Sounds to me like you have a rarified skill that is in demand in this specific instance so yes, absolutely, ask for a pay increase.  Politely, sweetly, and prepared to hear "no."


At what point does a PhD student have to commit to a research group (US)? I am planning to apply to PhD programs in the US this Fall (to start in 2020). I have been looking at various institutions and research groups in my area and I am wondering at what point a PhD student generally has to commit themself to a particular research lab/group?

For example, is it at the time they apply for the program at that institution? I can imagine this might be the case, because the labs will have a limited amount of funding, so the institution would need to know what group you will be working with when they make offers, to ensure that no group ends up being over-subscribed for their funding level. Would an offer for a PhD studentship typically be conditional that you join a particular lab after accepting?

However, I have read in some places that, during the first year or semester, PhD students typically 'shop around' the various labs they are interested in, to speak to more people in the lab than they were able to meet before they applied, before they decide which lab they will join. This seems to make better sense to me, in terms of finding the right 'fit' with a lab/PI. However, if the research group is not determined until after a PhD student starts the program, is there a possibility that some labs might end up over-subscribed; some students may not end up at the lab they wanted when they applied; or even that a PhD student could end up not being placed with a PI at all?

Or, does the system work differently for different institutions?

I have heard about some PhD students changing groups mid-way through their PhD, because they found the first lab was not a good fit. So, it seems that there must be some level of flexibility to move around and change groups after starting a program.

This can depend a bit on field and even by institution. It would also make some difference if you are applying with a BS or an MS already in hand. If you are early in the process then the early part of the doctoral program will likely involve advanced coursework, so choosing a specialty can typically be put off.

But starting later, ready for research, it will probably be an advantage to know, going in, which group (or groups) you are most compatible with.

But overall, your assessment in the question is correct. People choose a bit later than first contact and some people change. In math, for example, there is less reason to choose early than in, say nuclear physics, where expensive labs might be part of the process.

I changed groups because I changed institutions. The old situation didn't work out for me. I joined the new group relatively soon but held an MA at that point and knew who I wanted to work with. But it wasn't a choice made in the first weeks.


How to grab the attention of a new area's big names to read my work? I am a beginner researcher in a relatively new area. I published two papers in a conference directly related to the general field of my research (the general field is Artificial Intelligence or AI). Still there is no major conference for the new area; only one workshop and several special editions in top journals. As I am progressing in my PhD thesis, I see I am becoming a self-citation researcher.

Although the new area is attracting more people within AI and other disciplines, I am worried about my research. My advisor is happy and enthusiastic about my work. The big names in my research are well recognized in the AI field in general. My question is how to get their attention to read and therefore cite my work?

It's generally acceptable to e-mail senior scientists a copy of your paper. Say who you are and who your advisor is, describe your paper very briefly, and tell them that if they have any comments you'd be grateful to hear them.

Most will ignore you, don't take it personally -- it's not something that will "count against you", unless you do it too often, or to people who's research has nothing to do with your paper. Usually this just means they're too busy or have nothing in particular to say. But you might get a couple of interesting and/or supportive replies. I did, when I was a grad student.


How to demonstrate leadership quality I am postdoc in computational biology field and writing one grant proposal. One of the section of the application expect applicant to show

  how he/she will reach maturity to become an independent researcher?

This further expect me to show 'leadership' quality and should be supported by content from my CV. How shall I write this section?

I found this answer which suggests some points for the developed researcher looking for permanent position. At my current (early career) stage, I do NOT have any of following,

Having written and administered a grant proposal
Having been invited to sit on a review panel
Having been an invited speaker
Having organized a conference session
Having published a review paper

I have only mentored few students (but don't have any proof). Any suggestion?

'leadership' quality

The achievements and skills that you describe are more capabilities of an independent and respected researcher in your field.

Evidence of leadership usually pertains to roles at different groups.
The more traditional "leadership" activities are usually representative or publicity roles for your department or college. Committees, uni groups, local community groups that reflect your research area and you are able to represent your uni/college.
Representative roles at your professional association, invited government roles, leadership roles at conferences or journals, etc.
This university gives some examples of the expected evidence for each academic level - James Cook University Academic Promotion Evidence

There are "non-traditional" activities that has done well for other professors that I know.
One professor's blog became a world leader in the field with a great list of contributors and research stemming from her blog which supported her academic promotion.
Another professor runs a great Facebook group that has become a defacto society/research group for her small field.
Anything that points to respect and trust from a group seems to be good indicators for leadership.


Is it possible to pursue Physics PhD with poor mathematics background? I am a 2 year (3rd semester) undergraduate student in physics and I have scored miserably in my two advanced mathematics courses. I got C- in both. It was mainly for not understanding many things. I would like to do advanced research in the future and that would require a PhD degree.

I don't know what field I would like to specialize in, but I would like to achieve my dream of pursuing research as a career. Is it possible to get a PhD after bad grades in mathematics undergrad courses?

I am from India and I would like to do my PhD in the US.

As the comments (so far) say, it is very hard to succeed in physics without quite a lot of mathematics. But you don't need everything in mathematics to do so. Some skills are more important than others. Statistics can be important in some fields.

But, first you should figure out which aspect of physics you want to work in. It is an incredibly wide field. Then, look to see which parts of math are most important there. A trusted faculty member can help you with this part, perhaps.

But then, focus on learning those parts of math and the background necessary to understand it. Lots of people do poorly in math because their early teaching was inadequate and they missed the foundations on which to build. If that is the case here, then your path may be long, but it is possible to follow it.

There are several parts of mathematics that require insight, not just facts and skills. Those require work to achieve the insight. And the insights are hard to transmit from one person to another. But math is a problem you will likely need to solve to be a success in academia as a physicist.


How to narrow down focus in humanities/social sciences? I’m looking to enroll in a social studies/humanities undergraduate course, but I’m unsure of which subjects to focus on in my studies. I have ambitions to progress on to postgraduate study, research and academia; industry and financial gain aren’t on my radar.

Philosophy, politics, history and international relations all seem good fits, that could open up lots of opportunities, but how would you decide which subjects are most aligned with your interests, and crucially which combinations would be feasible and most facilitate further study/research?

Ultimately it's up to you to decide what you are most interested in. No one can answer that for you. That said, it's very important that you get an idea of what research is like in all of these fields, as it is often very different from what popular conception or even undergraduate coursework is like.

Assuming that you are relatively early in your undergraduate studies:

Take a variety of classes in the fields you are most interested in. Go farther than just what the class requires: go to office hours, talk to your professors, think about and discuss other questions of extensions related to the coursework, dig into any references that are mentioned in lecture, etc.
Find a faculty mentor(s) to talk about these issues with. This might first take some narrowing down of your interests, but a faculty member should be able to give you some guidance on how your interests fit into academia and an idea of what academic work in that field is actually like. This will often be a professor from a class, but many departments also have a designated faculty member that handles the undergraduate program who may be available to talk to. In my experience, most academics will be excited to talk to you if you express interest in further graduate study.
Try to get some actual research experience. This is heavily field-dependent and I am not very familiar with research opportunities in the humanities, but hopefully you will have some faculty members that you can talk to about this. If you are in a field that doesn't often use research assistants, see if you can do a faculty-directed independent study.
Start familiarizing yourself with some of the academic customs in the fields you're most interested in and start reading some actual research. A good place to start is often the webpages of the faculty at your school that you are most interested in. Read up on their latest publications/books/etc. and use that as a starting point to get at least a small idea of what kind of work is being done and what research looks like.
Find some current graduate students at your school and talk to them about what kind of research they are working on, how they go about doing it, and why they chose that field.


Is there an international taxonomy of academic titles/ranks? Looking at the list of academic ranks on Wikipedia shows that the same academic rank/title can mean quite different things in different countries. For instant, a "research assistant" in the US can stand for an undergrad student doing an internship, while in the UK it can stand for a postdoc. Similarly, the term "lecturer" might stand for a permanent position (e.g. in the UK) or for a teaching assistant position, open to graduate students.

However, when thinking about it, there are not so many kind of possible positions (permanent or not, with teaching or not, with research or not, with PhD supervision or not, with team responsibility or not, etc), and having a clear title could help a lot (for instance, in my case, I've been working in four different countries, with a different job title each time!).

Is there some kind of official taxonomy that one could refer to?
If not, who could be in charge to create it? (the EU, if only for intra-Europe mobility?)

In general, the answer is negative.

Not only there are different systems in different countries (and same-spelled degrees may have different requirements), but even if a degree seems to be the same, it is not necessary  considered equivalent.

Often universities and institutes have some freedom in the interpretation of degrees earned in other countries. Common sense can be a good guide but in case of doubt you need to check if university (or institute) X accepts a foreign academic title Y instead of their Z.

For example, when I obtained degrees licencjat (3 years undergraduate, 180ECTS) and magister (5 years undergraduate, 300ECTS) from a Polish university, they refused to translate it into anything else (stating explicitly that it is not equivalent to anything else). However, some other Polish universities do translate it into Bachelor of Science and Master of Science, respectively. Nevertheless, my new institute didn't have problem to find them qualifying me for their PhD program.


Awaiting an LoR request response So, I have emailed my professor to ask if he felt comfortable with writing me an LoR during the weekend. I got an automated response stating that he won’t be back till this  Monday, it’s currently Wednesday and Tuesday was a state holiday. I know he just got back, has young children, and his research going on, but the wait is making me anxious. What I am asking is whether or not this is a no, maybe he’s avoiding me? I only doubt his agreement to writing me one because I got a B- in his class, and only have talked to him a few times during office hours. However I will be in another’s lecture of his next semester, and he’s approved me to be a lab course intern next semester as well. What are your opinions? Could it be that I don’t have a strong enough relationship for him to write me an LoR? Thanks in advance!

You only got a B- in his class and only talked to him a couple of times during office hours.  You sent mail over the weekend just before a two-day holiday and got an automated response that he was out of town.  It's
 the first day back and you're already worried that he hasn't responded.

In both cases, your expectations are unreasonable.  You didn't do very well in his class and he hardly knows you.  What exactly do you expect him to say that could possibly help your chances of admission anywhere?  He can't just make stuff up, he can only report what he actually knows about you, which is that your performance wasn't that good.  You need to request references from instructors who gave you A's, not B-'s.  And pick people who actually got to know you because you showed up at their office more than just a couple of times and for more than just help on the homework.

When you do ask, allow them time to respond.  Give them at least a week (longer if it's a holiday!) to say yes or no, and then at least a month (more is better!) to write the letter.  (Be sure to tell them the deadline and how the letter has to be submitted.)

You should also provide a set of materials to help your reference write a good letter. It should include a list of schools where you’re applying, copies of your transcript, resume or CV, statement of purpose, and a short reminder of who you are, e.g., the class you took from them, where you used to sit, why they might remember your work or some discussions you had, perhaps a photograph. It’s okay (and helpful) to suggest strengths you hope your reference can speak to, e.g., your creativity, ability for abstract thought, contributions to a group.

Depending on the privacy laws in your country, you may also need to state explicitly, "You have my permission to discuss my academic performance."  For example, here in the US, instructors are prohibited by FERPA from discussing a student's performance without explicit permission.


Publishing on arXiv in preparation for WWW conference There's a framework I've been working on and I'm interested to release it to the open source and research community but I'd also really like to publish it at the upcoming WWW conference.

Is it against the rules of that conference to pre-publish a paper I later submit there, or at least the crux of such a paper, on a site like arXiv?

Since the conference will make  the papers from the proceedings open access "The proceedings of WWW are published online (open access) and through ACM Digital Library, and it is considered one of the most impactful conferences in computer science." I don't think the arxiv preprint should be a problem. However, you should e-mail first to the WWW2017 committee to see if this is against the rules.


How do you cite some commonly circulated image on the Internet with no source Pretend that there is some image on the Internet that is commonly circulated, like a meme template involving a picture of someone's face. If the original thing had no source, but one (for whatever reason) needed the image and its citation, how would one try to cite the image?

I would cite such a source in the same way as an anonymous or unknown author's work would be cited. You should consult whatever style guide you're using for your current manuscript.


Do big tech companies require on site interviews? I'm a postdoc in the US, from Europe originally. I plan on applying for research scientist positions at big tech companies in Canada e.g. Google, uber, etc (I want a change from the US).

My problem is that my travel outside of the US is restricted on my current visa. Is it possible to get positions at these companies without doing an onsite interview? Alternatively can I interview for positions at their offices within the US for positions in Canada? Has anyone had a similar issue or have any knowledge that may be helpful.

Thanks!

Every company will have its own procedures and likely other procedures that represent exceptions to the normal procedures. If a company is interested in you they will probably be able to find a way to make an interview happen. There are a lot of possibilities. Online interviews, via Skype and such, are becoming common at the early stages, at least, if not for final acceptance. Meeting a member of staff at a professional meeting in the US is a possibility.

If they show interest and want an interview discuss your travel restrictions. The problems with US visas and such are well known, especially, I think, in Canada. If they are interested enough then they will probably suggest something.

But at some point in the hiring process, companies like to have you visit your potential work site to meet a lot of people you'd be working with so you can get a sense about one another. They also like to show off the great work environment, especially if they really want you to join. That might be harder to arrange.


Schizophrenics with academic ambitions Frankly, to get to the point, I am schizophrenic.

University sucked for me, not because it was hard and difficult work; not because I didn't get along with people; not because I couldn't communicate points; and surprisingly not because I had anxiety. But because I carried a ball and chain of "voices in my head."

After five years of undergrad I dropped out.

I am a mathematician at heart. I study math to the point of extinction of all other thought. And I'm good at it. Now I'm no Gauss, Euler, Newton, or Galois. But I'm pretty damn good. I got in well with my professors, and managed to write a few papers which stated correct final results but were not without their subtle mathematical typos (slight errors in rigor, which in math can cost you everything).

I do not ever expect to achieve professor status. Quite frankly I wouldn't be able to be a professor anyway. I am in a secure place financially though, luckily I'm schizophrenic in a supportive, fairly well-off family, and live in a country with a supportive government (I live in Canada); so there's no worry of needing to sustain myself off mathematics. I just love math, and I know I have things to add, but I have no avenue of adding them.

To express some of my hinderances: conferences are pretty much off the table. Regular meetings with faculty are off the table. Extended interaction with a bunch of colleagues are off the table... you can start to see the chips are stacked against me.

I'm asking this on academia.stackexchange, because I can imagine there are schizophrenic academics out there, and I imagine they may have found loop holes, or loop holes may have been created for them.

So as the title preludes:

  As a schizophrenic with academic ambitions, what are my best options?

You wouldn't be the first mathematician with schizophrenia, of course. But you also don't really say whether you want to just do mathematics in a satisfying way, or to be known publicly for doing mathematics.

And, don't be concerned about making stupid errors. We all do that. I've made some real boners that I've luckily caught in a second or third proof reading of my work. Hopefully I catch them all before publication.

While you can learn mathematics from books (and even wikipedia), doing it is vastly simplified if you have someone to give you feedback on your work. It needn't be in person and it needn't be especially frequent.

Let's assume that you keep the medical condition within bounds via professional help, and let's also assume that you aren't dangerous to the public.

What would help you advance in math is to have a mentor of some kind who is aware of your medical condition and who treats you like a human being. If you live near a university, preferably a large one, but a small college might do, see if you can visit the place and introduce yourself to a few people. Universities often have seminars that are more or less open to the public. You can also just write to a department head, introducing yourself, without details, and asking for a meeting. Go with a friend if necessary. Take some of your work. See if you can't wrangle an introduction to someone who works in an area you are interested in. A high powered researcher with little time for distraction probably isn't the right mentor for you, but if your work is "interesting" some professors might be willing to look at it.

It is also possible to make a link from a distance by simply writing to such a professor, stating your interest, showing some of your work, and stating initially that a medical condition prevents your formal participation in most activities. You don't need to say more at the beginning, and can decide later whether revealing more is a good thing or not.

If you can make a link then you have a feedback mechanism for your work. You might even have a conduit for joint publications if the work is promising.

Once a link is made, you needn't necessarily interact in person with your mentor if that is difficult in any way. There are many collaborations that go on internationally simply using email, so distance is no longer a problem after initial contact.

Many mathematicians have worked long and hard in obscurity and done fine work. Sometimes their work is superior to the general run of it since they have their own way of looking at problems. It isn't impossible that the wiring of your brain gives you an advantage in mathematics if you can learn how to exploit it.


Phase out postdoc position I am a postdoc in cell biology and I'm considering to change my career path after having spent the last 1.5 years in a lab that has completely destroyed my passion for the academic life.

Background: I was working abroad for a few years and, due to personal reasons, I asked a PI with which I collaborated in the past the possibility to go back to the homeland. I knew this to be a suboptimal solution but I needed to go back. This PI accepted and, to smooth the transition, I wrote a EU grant proposal, which was funded (yay!) to move back to my homeland.

The new lab is mainly a clinically oriented lab run by MD, but it has contributed to the field with nice basic science discoveries, generally with the help of collaborating lab. My tasks were to basically to setup and run the cell biology section of the lab.

For the first year, I was forced to write grants for the two/three PIs in the lab and I (33 y.o.). We got in total 3 grants (~ 2 M€).

My project theoretically started last autumn, but I was "forced" by the PI to give priority to these new projects rather than to mine. Due to severe issues with our collaborators, I got the cell lines I wanted to work on in my project with 6 months of delay, and other issues did not allow me to physically start my project before 8 months of delay. Now, after 1 year into my project, the experiments have still to start, mainly due to:

the lack of a proper organisation in the lab: there are no lab meetings, there is no supervision on the experiments, the PIs work in a separate premise. There's also a shortage of workforce, as they pretend that 1 person (me) can run the whole cell culture facility AND perform functional experiments AND order reagents AND collect quotations from vendors AND do conference calls AND analyse results AND go to the ethic committee AND write grants.
a proper lab structure: all the 4 postdocs in the lab are treated as technicians and the PIs do not have skills to understand the basic science we do.  The two/three PIs do not understand that these are severe issues and they are constantly asking for results.
a decent mentoring: as I'm the most expert person in the lab concerning cell biology, I'm not receiving any helpful mentoring tips from my PI on my everyday work. Moreover, being the only one to understand a topic implies that the discussions on my topic are generally between me and myself.

Now, after 1.5 years in this lab I would really like to leave that toxic environment but this will mean to stop my EU-funded project (12 over 24 months left) and will clearly burn all the bridges for future academic position in my city and, probably, in the whole country.

I'm considering whether to switch to industry jobs, but this would mean to start again from scratch and acquire new skills. I've notice I've acquired skills and achievements (papers, h-index, citations, etc..) that are now completely useless in the current job market in my country. I'll do what necessary of course, but it will be a bad hit for both the spirit and the career. Start from scratch in another field in mid-30s isn't often a very successful strategy.

Do you have any tips or suggestion to escape from this toxic situation that is now also significantly affecting my health?

Thanks :)

I'm not familiar with finding mechanisms outside the USA, so I apologize for my ignorance. Are any of the grants transferrable? At least in the US, some of them are so if you switch institutions, that money goes with you. I would imagine most places would be happy to accept someone bringing them funding. If they are, try applying for positions at other institutions and make sure to mention that you already have funding and are bringing that funding to them.


How do I check my work is worthy? I would like to check if my mathematics paper is worthy of publication.

Is there any guide on the quality and form required for paper to be of publication quality?

Is there organization which will evaluate my paper for free?

How should I determine if my work is substantive enough to be grounds for pursuing PhD thesis?

Regarding the Ph.D. part of the question, only a school can grant a Ph.D., and no school will grant you a degree if you are not enrolled as a Ph.D. student.  Your best bet is probably to contact the mathematics department at a nearby research university and ask if a faculty member would be willing to look at your work.  If you have really been doing original research on your own, then you can probably be admitted as a student and begin working toward a degree.

Regarding the journal part of the question, most journals do not charge fees to authors (they make their money from subscription fees).  Most journals have web sites that explain the format and process for submitting a paper.  See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Academic_publishing#Publishing_process for a description of how this works.


Can a phd thesis be in a different area than the master thesis? First of all let me begin with saying that I have seen there is a question quite similar to this one, but I thought I'd ask again so I could get more specific about my situation since I am guessing it's different for every major.
I am currently doing a master in mathematics, thinking about possibly pursuing a phd after that. During my undergraduate studies in mathematics, I mainly took pure math classes with an extra emphasis on algebra related courses(group theory, field theory, applied algebra). So far I thought that if I were to do a phd it would be in algebra.
During my masters I also continued with pure math classes, such as real analysis, algebra etc. But I am currently taking a class in theory of computation and it has really caught my attention. That along with the fact that during the last year of my undergraduate studies I took a class in design & analysis of algorithms which I really enjoyed, has made me thinking that maybe if I were to do a phd, it wouldn't necessarily be in algebra after all but maybe in something in the interface of mathematics and theoretical computer science or in foundations of mathematics,or maybe even something that combines algebra with theoretical computer science if there's even something like that. Not really sure yet.
My questions are:  1. Can my master thesis area be different than my phd area? If yes, how different?Say if I were to do a master thesis in pure or applied algebra, would it be possible to then pursue a phd in something that maybe combines math and theoretical computer science?  2. What kind of background is needed for a phd in a topic somewhere between pure math and theoretical computer science? Would maybe a second masters in computer science be needed? (Also I guess a good 3rd question would be if maybe having taken only 2 classes in theoretical computer science that I enjoyed is not enough for me to be able to tell if I would actually like something like that?)

A big part of the Theoretical Computer Science (language theory, automata theory, Turing machines and other computational devices) is actually a part of algebra so if you switch to TCS, you won't change the area too much. But in general changing the area when going from Masters to PhD is not a problem at all. People sometimes even have multiple PhDs in different totally disjoint areas.


Is it ethical to express thanks and gratitude to a reviewer in the reply to the review text? I want to know whether is it ethical to express thanks and gratitude to a reviewer
in the reply to review text. I feel we should express thanks to reviewers who spent valuable time to review our work.

Yes, how could it possibly be unethical to thank someone? This is very common.


What are the best question to ask a committee panel after a PhD interview? I've a Skype interview for PhD application (it will make me miss one of my classes today.) I've been asked, in advance, to prepare a short presentation and then there would be some discussion with the panel (I guess.) I expect that they will ask if I have some questions so, I'm wondering what are the best (type of) questions one might consider?

It is not mandatory to ask questions. Generally they offer you the opportunity to ask questions in case you are not sure or confused about anything or any process related to application/lab/university.

When I had given PhD application interview almost all times interviewer asked me if I have any question. I didn't ask questions for most of the time. However few times I do asked question specially when position they were offering had partial financial support from supervisor. That case I asked about chances of getting rest of financial support. They were quite helpful and actually suggested me to check for RA positions in other related departments. In another case, I asked professor about possibility of collaborative work because I was interested in some interdisciplinary work. He was very impressed by question as it showed that I had already focused area of interest.

I also remember few of my friends have asked questions like, "Are there many flowering plants around campus because I am allergic to pollen-grains?" , "Can I get accommodation on campus if a dependent is accompanying me? ", "You were working on XX problem before are you still working on that?" etc.

You should ask questions depending on university you are applying and professors interviewing you. Do some basic research on their background from university web page. Don't ask cliche questions and don't ask for the sake of asking.


I feel that I have a weak application. Should I take a gap year before applying to grad school? A little about me:
-I'm a math major.
-I'm going to be starting my senior year this fall.
-I have the credits to graduate early, at the end of the fall semester.
-I have taken a few graduate level math classes, computer science and statistics  classes, and science classes (psychology, biology, chem, physics).
-I'm leaning towards applied math.
-I go to my state school, which isn't very selective or prestigious.
-I have a 3.9 GPA.

I haven't had any advising beyond getting me to fulfill my graduation requirements and now it's my senior year and I still don't know what I want to do career-wise.  I think I want to go to graduate school because I really enjoy the school environment and learning, but I'm not 100% certain.

Assuming I do choose the grad school path, I feel that my application would be weak at this point. I would like to stand a chance at getting into a more prestigious program than my state school.

-I have not taken the GRE General or GRE Math test. These seem to be the most important factors in admission. I don't know that it's possible to get a good score on both between now and the application deadlines around December.
-I have no research experience yet. I plan to assist a professor with research in the fall, but I wish I would have more prior to applying.
-I have little work experience so my resume isn't impressive.
-I still don't know what program/research area I'd want to go into. I think this would show in my personal statement and recommendation letters.

Do I have time to improve all this before the application deadline? Should I take a gap year to see if I can get some research/work experience, make sure I want to go/figure out what I want to research, and do well on the GRE? Does a gap year weaken an application?

I think you are overemphasizing the importance of the GRE. Consider it as a box you need to check, rather than "the most important factors in admission". Still, you should get started on that process only because opportunities to take the test are few and far between, and if you are ill the day you intend to take the test or otherwise do poorly, you might want a second chance.

I think you still have time to get some research experience. I don't know what is available in your field of study and at your institution, but in my field I would recommend you find a lab that would possibly be interested in hiring you on in the spring after you graduate, assuming things go well in the fall. Although applications will be due before that spring semester, at least you will be demonstrating your interest in research, and hopefully you can get a decent letter of recommendation from your research advisor.

I would also suggest finding a faculty mentor: not an administrative academic advisor, yes, those people are mostly interested in your undergraduate progress, you need to talk to professors who have gone through the grad school experience, who are involved in admissions for graduate school, etc (of course one of the disadvantages of a smaller state school is that no one there may have experience with graduate admissions, except as a student).

I don't think there is an either/or question here. If you are set on doing graduate school, you should apply and plan for what you might do to make your application better next year if you don't get into a program you like this time.


Assuming the rest of your application is solid, is a gre score of 160Q and 155V good enough for a math phd? I plan on applying to graduate school school soon and I'm confident the rest of my application will be pretty solid. However, I'm worried that a quant score of 160-163 will put me below the other applicants. Most have quant scores of 165+. I could break this, but I have a huge problem of making silly mistakes when under pressure and trying to keep a good pace.

Every school is different in how they view this, but I think the consensus now is that such scores are not as important as they once were. On the other hand, you have a negative piece of information about you, and you want to balance it, or overcome it, with lots of positive pieces of information.

I suspect that most places, with the possible exception of very large programs, take a more wholistic view of their incoming candidates. If your total application package is strong, I wouldn't worry about it, but be prepared to discuss it in an interview.

In fact, exams of that sort favor certain kinds of learners and disfavor others. This is, I hope, fairly widely recognized. The tag on the question suggests you want to study mathematics. Lots of mathematics isn't about "quantity" at all, and requires a different sort of thinking. Spacial, for example, or highly abstract thought.

But knowing that you make silly mistakes under pressure, you might want to find a way to address that directly, though I can't help you there. I assume there are academic counsellors who have the expertise to give you a start on it, at least.

You will find a lot of pressure in grad school, of course. A lot of pressure. You will want to find ways to both lessen it and to deal with it. On the other hand, not everything is like a high-stakes test, so the pressure is of a different sort.

The wisdom (?) of the internet suggests: https://www.thoughtco.com/do-you-have-a-good-gre-score-how-to-tell-1686221


Should I inform my potential advisor that my paper got rejected? I am a recent M.Sc. graduate and I have applied for a few PhD programs abroad.

A few months ago, we submitted our paper (which was about my thesis results) to a journal and also uploaded it to a pre-print server. Then, I mentioned the paper in my CV with the status "submitted to journal X". In my Skype meeting with a potential advisor from a university abroad, I mentioned the fact that we submitted the paper and we have not been notified about the result yet. Then, I sent the link of the paper on pre-print server to him according to his request.

Today, I got informed by the journal's editor that our paper got rejected from journal X. Now I don't know if I need to tell this fact to the potential advisor in our next Skype meeting or through other mediums like email? In general, I guess he will not ask about the status of our paper. If he asks about it, I definitely would answer truthfully. But I don't know should I tell him about the rejection even if he does not ask about it?

Actually, the journal quality is very high and we believe that we can publish our paper in another good journal elsewhere. However, the professor is from a different field and he may not know how hard it is to publish in journal X. Thus, I think that this news unfairly ruin my admission chance.

I don't think that being rejected by a top tier journal of your field should reduce your chances to get the PhD position in any way. Your potential advisor most likely knows this all too well. This is part of the scientific professional life. I would assume that s/he can judge the work you did regardless of his field of expertise our whether it got accepted or not. But if it was well written, presented in a clear and structured way, he or she will appreciate that because it is such an important skill.

You don't need to mention it yourself if you feel uncomfortable about that. However if you want, you can say that you got rejected by X, but think that with the feedback you got you can really improve the manuscript and will try to publish it elsewhere. This will show your motivation. Most likely your advisor will be happy about that.


“Percent” in chart title and on axis – redundant? Consider the chart below:

When writing percent in the title, and % on the axis marks, is this redundant? Is the word amount preferable?

I haven’t seen this addressed in any style guides such as the APA guidelines.

Percentage (parts per hundred) and, more broadly, abbreviations like ppm (parts per million) or ppb (parts per billion) do not describe any quantity, they are just multipliers for dimensionless quantities.

In a graph, instead, you should accurately describe the quantity being represented. In the example given in your question, a more appropriate title would probably be: "Fraction of the widgets that are blue".

In the SI brochure, §5.3.7, the document that defines the International System of Units, it is stated that

  In mathematical expressions, the internationally recognized symbol % (percent) may be used with the SI to represent the number 0.01. Thus, it can be used to express the values of dimensionless quantities.

and, furthermore,

  Phrases such as "percentage by mass", "percentage by volume", or "percentage by amount of substance" should not be used; the extra information on the quantity should instead be conveyed in the name and symbol for the quantity.

The percent symbol can, instead, appear in the tick labels.


Would/could PIs hire a consulting company to do partial work that's not in his/her field I understand that it is usually not difficult for PI to find another professor in the same campus or city for collaboration on a multi-field project (e.g. computational chemistry). However, when the demand of long term collaboration is not huge, would PIs consider to hire some outsiders or consulting companies to do the work? And is it allowed under NIH funding systems?

(For example, a task may only require a few hundreds line of coding, which can be done by an experienced programmer in the field. The work may be a bit too lack of rewards for a new collaborator. Wouldn't it be cheaper and more realistic for a chemistry PI to hire a consultant in this case, than getting a new PhD student or post-doc in programming? )

Thanks.

Do you exclusively mean non-academics? Sometimes a collaborator is included in another department or another academic institution to bring in such expertise. This can have it's downsides depending on which agency you are including since there may be costs to subcontracting or collaborating with another entity. It's possible that a Computer Scientist or Engineer down the hall or across campus has the student that can do the work without having to write in a professional contractor, though it is certainly possible to use a contractor. My wife works for a web firm and is currently responding to an RFP from a university to do user experience work for a web-based NSF project.


Repeat dropper and failure at multiple community colleges. Is there no hope for me? I had a very rough upbringing and I have been lost for all my 20's. I just turned 30 a month ago and its really hitting me hard. I dont want to be a nobody all my life.

I've finally had enough and I have a fire lit under my ass to change my life, but before I can, I need some questions answered:

I want to go back to community college and transfer to a UC (berkeley or UCLA) to get an EE or CS degree. I know I am capable of it and I know I can do it, there is nothing stopping me, I am so hungry for it.

However, in my early 20's I was enrolled at 3 different community colleges at different times and flunked out each time. When the time comes that I want to transfer, will this screw me over? I have heard in the past that they will find out all schools you went to, is this true? These events happened about 10 years ago, do community colleges keep transcripts this long for inactive students? Could I simply just enroll into a community college that I have never attended?

I dont know what my best course of action is, if I did academic renewal on all 3 schools, would they not factor in all the GPAs?

I'm just having a hard time thinking lets say I go back to community college and get a 4.0 with 60 credits.  But since I have my previous past grades with pretty much less than a 1.0, effectively making my GPA like a 1.5 or something.  Is this how it works when I want to transfer?  I understand there are personal statements and all that stuff but would this all be for nothing if I decide to go back to school?

Thank you for any help you can offer.  Im in a dire situation.

If you succeed now in community college, the previous failures are unlikely to be a factor.

The point of the admissions process is to determine whether you are capable of succeeding in a university now, not ten years ago.  Your recent track record will demonstrate your present ability best and will be weighed most heavily.

Plus, you have a very plausible story for why things are different now: you have matured, and now have a motivation and direction you didn't have previously.  When you do apply, you should highlight this story.

I don't think there will be a problem here, assuming you succeed now (best of luck to you).

If you do attend the same institution, you should apply for an academic renewal, so that your previous failure doesn't drag down the GPA.

At other institutions, don't worry about it.  You may need to include a transcript for them, but the old GPA will be considered ancient history and will probably not make any difference.


Does a publication in a predatory journal negatively impact admissions decisions? I have published an original research paper in what was claimed by Beall's list to be a predatory journal. Considering the way they reviewed my paper, the corrections they gave me, and the many citations from typical research papers, I don't believe that it is predatory, especially since I don't think that the journal conforms with the criteria of Beall's list of predatory journals.

Nevertheless, I want to know what negative impact publishing in a predatory journal has on admissions chances.

Beall's List sometimes overshoots, though it's a good starting point.

I wouldn't say publication there will automatically hurt your admission chances, as especially if you're very junior I'd actually assume you had been naive. What it likely won't do is help all that much - predatory or not, it's doubtful it's a particularly well regarded journal in the field.

I'd also be careful how I presented it. In your cover letter, if you mention your work being published in "such notable publications as the International Journal of Obviously a Scam..." then it's likely I'll convert my impression of you from naive to oblivious. And while I've never seen this done with a predatory journal, I've definitely seen some people tout papers in pretty low-ranked journals as if they were at the top of the field, and that's always a bad sign.

It's not a death sentence, but you should be aware of what that paper is, and isn't. And I'd be prepared to talk about your experience, and how they did provide useful feedback, etc. Journals can be sincerely trying to get out of the predatory pool (or sliding into it...).


How long before PhD graduation should I start applying for post-doc positions? My earliest PhD graduation date is 10 months away. Funding permits me to stay 1–3 months longer, so the final date is still uncertain.

It is never too early to make contacts for possible post-docs. But how long in advance is too early to formally apply to post-doc job openings or funding opportunities? Depending on the bureaucracy, the path from applying to starting can probably be anything from a week up to a year — someone I know is applying with ESA which had the opening advertised in August, application deadline in October, will have interviews in December/January, and the commencement of work only in September, 13 months after the initial job advertisement. My personal guess is that the long time between interviews and starting is to create a level playing field between those who do and those who don't need to go through a visa application procedure.

If I'm too early in applying for a post-doc, a hosting institution might prefer someone who can start earlier and where the graduation date is more certain. For example, in my case the graduation date is still uncertain, so there is a risk in accepting even if they are willing to wait. Project funding might also require the money to be spent rather soon.

If I wait too long, there might be a considerable period where I'm between jobs. Having a long (>6 months) period between jobs is a disadvantage for me. Maybe it's also a disadvantage for a hosting institution (I'm not sure).

How do I find the balance? For example, considering the duration of funding and visa applications, does it make sense to apply e.g. 8 months in advance? Or is it in any case virtually inevitable to have at least several months before my PhD graduation and the start of a post-doc?

It depends on the type of funding associated with the postdoc position:

1) If the funding is already there and has a limited duration (for instance a one-year funding within a one-year research project), then indeed, the recruiter might not want to wait 10 months for you, since it would mean that an important part of the funding might be "wasted".

2) If the funding is already there, but can be used later on (for instance a one-year funding within a five-year research project), then it could be possible to start only in 10 months.

3) If there is no funding yet, and you need to get it yourself, then you have to start as early as possible, since it can take a long time for the whole process to finish.

Note that case 3 is usually a process you started with a potential advisor, rather than answer to a particular announcement. In any case, it's always a good thing to informally contact potential advisors directly to see about the specificity of a particular position.


Should I use a linear function or two linear functions to grade scores? In Chile, we score from 1 to 7 (this is a legal normative), where 4 is the minimum grade to pass. Thus, the passing grade corresponds to halfway point (50%) of the grade span (from 1 to 7). However, it is common practice to require a minimum score of 60% to pass (e.g. 6 points of 10). This creates a dissonance between the minimum grade and the minimum score to pass.

If we use a minimum score of 50% (4) to pass, we use a linear function to assign grades. However, if we use a minimum score of 60%, we need two functions to calculate grades from scores. In other words, the function breaks at the minimum grade to pass, such that points at the bottom (below 4.0) are worth less than the points at the top (above 4.0).

Having two functions to assess the performance troubles me. In other words, people that have more troubles in the course are being evaluated with harder standards than the ones with better performance.

One solution to this problem would be to change the grading scale. Unfortunately, this is not legally an option in the short term. A second solution would be just to drop the minimum passing score of 60%. But I think sometimes you may need to increase the grading difficulty because of the importance of the content you are teaching.

Under those circumstances, what is the better solution in this case: a single linear function or two different functions to grade scores?

You should focus on getting the grading correct for students who do much better than just passing, who score within the range where you would personally draw the line between who is an expert who has completely mastered the subject and who is good but needs to study a bit more to be considered to be an expert. This line is not usually at 100% because you can make minor errors even if you are an expert, it's more typically somewhere between 80% and 100%. You then want to assign some grade, say 7 to students who are at or just above that boundary, which mans that the boundary percentage should be mapped to 6.5.

The goal of teaching is to assist students who do their best and may go on to embark on an academic career, it's not about catering to students who for whatever reasons end up not doing well. The students who are not doing well risk getting into problems; if they score sufficiently low they'll not "pass the course" but it's just a total waste of efforts to figure out how to draw the line for that.

Your attitude should be that someone who scores well below, say, 85% has de-facto failed the course, but in the gray area between, say, 60% and that 85%, they are not going to be deprived of a diploma just because they didn't do well on your exam. Whether that 60% becomes 50% or 65% should not be of any concern to you. That uncertainty should make your students who are not studying hard enough worry a bit more so that they end up studying harder.


How can I avoid being "the negative one" when giving feedback on statistics? Results get sent around a group of biological collaborators for feedback. Comments come back from the senior members of the group about the implications of the results, possible extensions, etc. I look at the results and I tend not to be as good at the "big picture" stuff (I'm a relatively junior member of the team), but I'm reasonably good with statistics (and that's my main role), so I look at the details.

Sometimes I think to myself "I don't think those conclusions are remotely justified by the data".  How can I give honest feedback in a way that doesn't come across as overly negative? I can suggest alternative, more valid approaches, but if those give the answer "it's just noise", I'm pouring cold water over the whole thing.

I would suggest approaching your colleague in a humble and inquisitive way (especially since you're a junior member of the team). If you start the conversation with "your conclusions are wrong and here's why" you're going to set a combative tone for the rest of the meeting. There may be reasons that they interpreted the data the way they did that you're not aware of.

Instead try approaching the situation with something similar to "I looked at the data and came to this interpretation, can you explain your interpretation to me?" You're a researcher in your own right, so junior or not your opinion should be valued. But at least with this approach you indicate that you are open to the idea of being wrong, and hopefully that will start a constructive conversation where you can debate the merits of analysis type A over type B, etc.


Making time to catch up with people at a conference I am attending a number of short (two and three day) conferences this fall. In the past I have scheduled meetings (e.g., time to chat and catch up over meals and coffee breaks) with people prior to the conference in an attempt to maximize my ability to catch up with colleagues/friends. This approach, however, doesn't work for me. To often meetings get cancelled and if I fill in my schedule too much it is hard to reschedule. Other times I have taken the play it by ear approach and catch up with who I catch up with.

Is there a good strategy for catching up with colleagues whom you already know well (I am not asking about strategies for meeting new people)?

Skip the talks

Except for meals, most of the time at a conference is taken up by scheduled talks. Don't go to them.

Ok, go to some of them. But if you want to get some work done, catch up with a colleague during a coffee break, take a look at the schedule, find a session (or two, or three) that seem extra boring, and agree to skip them. Use that time to go to a coffee shop, or sit in a quite space in the conference center.


Publishing journal articles based on dissertation My dissertation is drafted in a paper format which consists of three papers that I am planning to publish in future. Can I submit the manuscript to journals in 'as is' condition or I will have to draft new manuscripts based on the old manuscripts.

Please advise.

Thank you.

It is often possible to republish your dissertation as articles but it depends on the publishers and it sometimes requires permission.

Journal publishers will generally not publish work that is published elsewhere but dissertations are a common exception. This page run by the MIT libraries lists many science and engineering publishers and their rules about publishing articles that first appeared in dissertations. For other publishers, you'll need to check websites or ask journal staff or editor.


Why does the Clinical Journal of Sports Medicine think they will need quadrillions of DOIs? The Clinical Journal of Sports Medicine uses the following format for Digital Object Identifiers:

  DOI: 10.1097/JSM.0000000000000xxx

Where xxx is a simple incrementing count, currently in the 200s, based on order of article publication. The latest issue has 26 articles, and they publish bimonthly, for a total of under 200 articles per year. Theoretically, if they increased publication to daily, they could reach 10000 articles per year. Hence, their 16 digit format will be sufficient for at least a trillion years.

Simple question: why? The usability is terrible; it's very difficult to transcribe by hand. They could chop the number of digits in half without any realistic risk of running out.

This "answer" is really speculation - if you truly want to know their motivations, you have to ask them.

But I think the simplest and most likely explanation is that they don't consciously believe they will need that many DOIs; they just had to pick some format, and arbitrarily chose a number of digits that seemed more than adequate (as well as perhaps allowing for DOIs to be assigned in some other way than just serially; e.g. someday the DOI could identify volume, year, page number, etc).

They probably didn't even think about people needing to transcribe them by hand - and to be fair, in this age of electronic distribution and copy/paste, it's a pretty rare use case.


How can a prospective PhD student assess whether a potential PhD advisor is hands-on or hands-off? Different ways I thought of:

Looking at the size of the potential PhD advisor's lab: e.g., if many (>10) PhD students or post-doc, then likely to be quite hands-off.
Asking current or former members of the potential PhD advisor's lab. (but sometimes it is difficult to establish contact with them and obtain a frank answer, plus that's a bit tedious to do for each potential PhD advisor's lab).
Directly asking the potential PhD advisor but I am unsure whether this is a wise approach as for example if the prospective PhD student is asking the potential PhD advisor whether they are hands-on or hands-off, this could be construed as being too much dependent or independent from the PhD advisor (e.g., a hands-off PhD advisor would typically prefer independent PhD students), which might reduce the chance of being accepted in the PhD program in case of mismatch between the PhD advisor and prospective PhD student.

What could be other techniques for a prospective PhD student assess whether a potential PhD advisor is hands-on or hands-off, preferably without impacting that chance is to be accepted in the PhD program?

Just ask their graduate students.  There’s no reason people won’t be frank about this question, hands-off advisors don’t think being hands-off is a bad thing and vice-versa.


Is it usual to 'cut and paste' from the 'Case for Support' into the Je-S online form? I'm in the process of completing a UK grant application. As is usual, a 6-page 'Case for Support' is required, but there is also a lengthy online application process via Je-S (https://je-s.rcuk.ac.uk), which seems to require much the same information as in the CfS.

I understand that the 'Impact Summary' required by Je-S is supposed to be different from the 'Pathways to Impact' in the CfS (the audience for the latter is for the reviewing panel, the former is the general public), but other than that, is it generally acceptable to complete the Je-S form by 'cutting and pasting'?

(The answer may vary depending on the research council you apply to, and the type of grant. Let me give my perspective as someone who applied for an EPSRC First Grant last year.)
I don't think that the Je-S form is supposed to be similar to the Case for Support. As you say, the audience for the Case for Support is reviewers, so there you are free to describe your project in detail, using appropriate technical language. By contrast, I think (at least some of) the material in the other parts of the Je-S is intended to be read by non-experts, including non-academics. For example the instructions for the "Summary" component read as follows:

The Summary is used for:
-Sending to potential Peer reviewers to determine whether the proposal is within their field of expertise
-To publicise the Councils research programmes to a variety of readers eg Opinion-formers and policy makers, the general public and the wider research community.
Explain in plain English:
-The context of the research.
-Its aims and objectives.
-Its potential applications and benefits.

In case you didn't see it, on the "Document Menu" page of the application, each item in the left-hand menu bar has a ? button that you can click to get some instructions. (Unfortunately, these instructions don't always clarify things very much.)


Differences between cover letter and research plan? I want to apply for a PhD positions and it says to include the following:

a cover letter
Research plan – this should be a personal statement motivating why you are applying for this position

I usually put in the cover letter the statement of why I am applying, but in this case how should I separate both of them?

In general, the discussion of research in a cover letter is much briefer than a research plan. The former is generally one or two paragraphs, while the research plan for PhD positions is typically one to two pages.

A good "research plan" (or in this case, more accurately a "statement of purpose") should explain why and how your past and present experiences prepare you to undertake the topic you'd like to study as a PhD student. Note that this is not meant to be a "life story"—we don't care what you did when you were five years old. Instead, tell us about relevant experience: research, professional experience, service work, and so on.


Is it common for undergraduate students to feel overwhelmed by the reading assignments? How to deal with it? I'm in the second year of an International Affairs undergraduate program.
When classes first began last year, I - like most of my peers - felt overwhelmed by the amount of text assigned for reading, which I averaged as 400 pages per week, the whole year.
I initially managed it by reading the texts faster than I should (thus not properly apprehending the text) and prioritising the ones with an obvious precedence and skipping others right away.
If that wasn't improper enough and made me feel lacking, we were briefed on how to do scientific reading in two of our disciplines. Basically we were 'taught' how to do a 'micro-research' on every text assigned to us, by first reading the text superficially, taking notes of everything unknown to us (authors, dates, events, places, concepts, word definitions) and then getting to know each of those, to just then go back to the text with the goal of apprehending and taking notes of the logical structure of the text, identifying its main theses and how arguments are presented, in order to be able to reconstruct the presentation the author gave accurately, either mentally, or when giving a speech or writing.
In theory, we should be doing that to every text. In practice, I felt like I barely had time to read the texts once and then I would go to the next. By the end of last year I assessed I had to at least double my reading skills to handle that amount of text. I maybe improved 20%, tops.
Now we began having online classes because of the pandemics. There was a lot of opposition from professors and students, but as a state university, costs were still running and there was a lot of pressure coming from the upper realms, thus, online classes began. Now, we're being given harder texts. I just finished watching a Political Theory class. I literally didn't understand any of the texts, neither the class itself made sense and my professor kept asking questions to me, it was frustrating.
It makes me feel somehow depressed and it makes it even worse when I see there are a few students who not only seem able to handle it, but are doing research and a lot of other stuff, I can't even imagine how they do it.
Edit: One thing that gets me beaten and very sick sometimes is how relatively unimportant authors that talk about the simplest concepts are the ones writing texts that almost demands me to become cryptologist. On the other hand, some of the authors presenting the most complex topics, e.g, Kant and Weber [especially Kant], despite being very demanding, seemed to be quite clear and straightforward in their argumentation. The problem here, again, was time. When reading Kant I had to skip almost all the other texts in other to complete it with a satisfiable understanding of the text. I got the 2nd best grade of the class in that discipline.
Edit 2: I also find it interesting, for lack of a better word, how some professors throw you in the lion's pit. For today's class we read a text by Italian Norberto Bobbio which is an answer to a critic of an earlier text. I felt totally out of context, as we didn't read the first text nor the critics, I was simply unable to understand half the text, as it was constantly referencing stuff we didn't read and would never be able to do it in time.

You don't need to read from the first word of the title to the last word of the conclusion. You should learn how to skim through the large materials. Use a highlight marker to highlight important sentences, terminologies, dates.

If you find it the text lengthy, try replacing it with online videos or similar shorter texts. A book can be replaced by a single research article.


Does a conference poster count as a publication for PhD application? I'm preparing a CV and required documents for PhD applications and I've been asked to provide references to publications. I've been wondering if it's appropriate and a good idea to put my student poster there?

The field is Computer Science and the poster has been presented during one of the top conferences. Posters were not part of proceedings and are not officially available (only online abstracts).

It's definitely a good idea to include such a poster in your CV or mention it elsewhere in your application (e.g. discuss it and the work in the personal statement). However, I would refrain from listing anything under "publications" unless it has been peer reviewed and published in a reputable journal.

I think in this particular case, the application is asking for references to papers rather than posters, but it may be worthwhile emailing the admissions people at the department to ask where you should include the poster.


How to transition from MBA in Finance to PhD in Financial Economics? I want to pursue a PhD in Financial Economics in USA/Canada. I am a software engineer and going to Canada to pursue an MBA in Finance in September from an average public university.

I have studied a lot of high level math courses in Engineering (Undergrad).  I will study many Finance and Econ courses in the MBA program.

I am interested in a PhD from a US university (average public university, not targeting top level).

I am really crazy about this subject. I know that I wasted a lots of time on other things but I still have time and I am very interested in teaching.

What opportunities can I take advantage of during the MBA to maximize my chances of PhD admission?

PhD programs exist to produce researchers, so an admissions committee would like to see that you will be able to produce original research. (In economics, that means journal articles.) So, what would help immensely would be to gain actual research experience. The best way to do that would be to work as a research assistant for someone who is actively publishing research.

It would be fantastic, of course, if you could co-author a paper and get it published in a top journal. But don't worry so much about that. What you're looking for is a chance to work with someone who can then write a letter of recommendation that says they are confident that you will go on to produce quality research of your own, and whose opinion will matter because they have a good track record of publishing their own work.

Add some statistics coursework to your programming experience and you'll be well-positioned to work as an RA. (Even without a stats background, being able to wield Perl or R or some other tool to collect and clean data is valuable.) Or find someone working with agent-based modelling who needs a code jockey. Then, of course, work hard and ask lots of questions.


How long will the status "awaiting decision" after minor revisions last? I submit my manuscript to IEEE WCL on 4/14/2019 (Minor revision). On 4/26, the status on ScholarOne changed to awaiting decision. But until now, 5/17, the status are still "awaiting decision". I want to know how long will this status last. Can I send a email to AE?

To summarize the comments: as long as it takes.  The AE is not solely employed by IEEE, but also has a faculty position (usually) and other obligations.  Although it's frustrating, your manuscript is probably one of many they are responsible for and they have their own stuff going on.  Don't email them. They know they have to make the decision, and your email will not make them do so any faster.  Unfortunately, you will just have to wait it out.


If I quit my PhD, would it make my advisor look bad? I am considering quitting my PhD in computer science, because after doing a software engineering internship I realized I enjoy that kind of work much more.

My advisor has been very kind to me, on both a professional and a personal level, and if I quit it might make her look bad. She is an assistant professor and I was her first student. I do not want people to think she was the one who made me quit.

Are people going to wonder if she was the reason I quit?

How much of an effect would this have on her career?

You are a nice guy, but let me tell you this: no matter if it makes your advisor look bad, if you really like the job in the company and believe it's the best thing for you, then you should quit your PhD and take the job. Doing your PhD just because of your advisor will not do any good to either you or your advisor.

Because pursuing a PhD requires a lot of determination. No matter how your advisor is kind to you, making your advisor look good will not be enough as a sole motivation for your PhD. If you don't quit now, you will quit later and it may cause more damage to your advisor.

For a complete stranger like me, if a guy quits his PhD after 1st or 2nd year, there are many reasons beside a bad advisor: maybe the guy himself finds PhD too difficult, or he changes his mind etc and etc. But if someone quits his PhD after 5th or 6th year, I would think there must be something wrong with the supervision.


How does the PhD experience differ for paying students? Some PhD programs offer students an opportunity to either pay for the PhD themselves or to take a teaching assistantship in exchange for a tuition waiver.

Aside from a lack of teaching duties, are the work requirements and responsibilities of a paid PhD student any different from those of the teaching assistantship students?

There are usually 4 ways to pay for a PhD in my experience in the US:

Out of pocket with your own money or with loans
Get a fellowship or scholarship
Be a Teaching Assistant
Be a Graduate Research Assistant

None of these are necessarily mutually exclusive. TA and GRAships usually come with a whole or partial tuition waiver or payment of tuition. Fellowships and scholarships may come from the university, another government entity (e.g. the US National Science Foundation or Department of Energy), or a private source.

In my estimation, a GRA or fully-funded private fellowship is the best way to pay for graduate school for those whose focus is research because there are no teaching or grading responsibilities to take time away from working on your research. If you intend to go on to a professorship, starting with a TA for the first few semesters or years may help you learn something about teaching, but I wouldn't have wanted the TA responsibilities during the time I was writing up my dissertation.

Myself, I had a GRA with my full tuition paid plus a small privately endowed fellowship administered by my university which supplemented my income. Also, at the time, having a GRA position gave me health insurance. TA and GRA jobs are usually limited to 20 hours a week during the long semesters in the US since you are likely to be in classes at the same time. My advisor frequently upped me to 40 hours per week during the summer and winter breaks to supplement my income further.

Paying your own way, whether with fellowships, loans, or your own personal savings means that you aren't being paid by the advisor. A GRA position may be required to focus on a particular research project that funds the existence of the position. If the money comes from their start-up package or a private source, then you may be given much more freedom in your choice of research work, but either way, the GRA position is a job that allows the advisor to direct your work much more than if you fund yourself.


How to explain to a student that it is common to include a supervisor as a co-author? In my field of research, it is common to include a supervisor as a co-author of a student's PhD research related papers. A supervisor mainly contributes by helping to improve the writing of a paper, such as emphasising its contribution or clarifying the content, etc. Which means that a supervisor does not contribute anything directly related to the research carried out in a paper, for instance, a supervisor may not even understand a method used in a paper.

Based on all the answers of this question, it is clear this custom is not applied to all fields, and I am not trying to argue if it is correct to do so or not.

I want to know how a supervisor explains to a new PhD student that he/she should include a supervisor's name in his/her papers. What happens if a student refuses to follow a custom?

PS: when I started my PhD, I already knew about this custom, so my supervisor did not need to explain it to me. But how about those that don't know or know differently?

If the student truly is writing a paper independently of the advisor, then the advisor shouldn't be a coauthor and it would be inappropriate for the advisor to demand this.

In the more usual situation in which the advisor provides the the dissertation  topic and works directly with the student in developing the dissertation (holding regular meetings, reviewing drafts of the thesis, meeting with the dissertation committee) and then papers based on the dissertation are published, the participation of the advisor would normally merit coauthorship.  In these situations the authorship of papers should be settled before the research work begins.

I make it a point to explain this to students before starting work with them on their theses and dissertations.  I simply wouldn't agree to supervise a student who would not agree to sharing authorship in this way.


Job market after PhD in Human Computer Interaction (HCI) Do people in the industry consider HCI a non-technical field? Do they expect an HCI researcher to have more design and social science skills than technical ones?

I am a little puzzled by your career goal and perhaps, this is rather early for you to decide.

Your immediate goals are:

Software Developer
Data Scientist

Your future goal is:

Entrepreneur

As far as I am aware, you don't need a phd to be a software developer and certainly not for an entrepreneur. So, discussion about a PhD in HCI is moot there.

There are also excellent data science jobs available with a bachelors or masters degree pre-requisite but a PhD can certainly help there.

A PhD candidate in HCI usually goes towards one of three ways -

They can gravitate towards usability design/usability studies/usability analysis. This requires ~60% knowledge in social sciences (e.g. theory, experimental design) and ~40% knowledge in the computing sciences - basically in applications (e.g. applied ML, application development)

They can also gravitate towards data analysis i.e what industry calls data science (I am not a fan of that term). For that, ideally they should have ~70% data analysis knowledge (ML is not the only approach for analyzing data) and ~30% social science knowledge. (i.e. if you are in the Facebook data science team and studying rumor propagation then you better have a very good intuitive grasp of cascades, diffusions and homo/heterophily theory). Many data scientists have 0 knowledge of their domain - which is both a reflection of their demand as well as the inchoate state of what "data science" actually is.

Finally, there are those rare few who manage a zen-like balance between social and computing sciences. They are equally good in qualitative and quantitative methodologies and have appreciation for all spheres of knowledge. Generally, I find these folks in academia (which is not to say that you won't find such folks in industrial research - you will!)

Answers to your particular question:

1. Do people in the industry consider HCI a non-technical field?

No. This depends on what your specialization is and what you have done so far.

2. Do they expect me to have more design and social science skills than technical ones?

No. Not necessarily. Again, this depends on who you are and what you have done so far.

3. Finally, does having a PhD in HCI hinder my chances to achieving my career goal

Yes, but its not a function of HCI but the fact of being enrolled in any PhD program. As I pointed out, you don't need a PhD to do software development or to be an entrepreneur. There is some advantage in having a PhD if you want to go specifically into data science but you can also see many counterexamples in industry - those who enter the data science domain with a MS and do extremely well.

Therefore, your current plan of action depends on what you want to do immediately. I urge you to ponder and self-reflect whether spending a sizable chunk of your adult life in a PhD is really worth it for you if all you want to do is to write code or start a business or analyze data.

Most PhD candidates from my departments and other similar ones in the US (CMU, UDub, GaTech etc.) either go into academia or into industrial research. I know of a few examples of folks who dropped out of their PhD with a MS because they realized that they don't want to do research but they want to contribute to industry in other ways.