Complaining about an ISI journal's unreasonable behavior I submitted one of my paper to an ISI journal in September 2011. While I was waiting for it, I inquired about its status (I needed the paper to complete my PhD), and the journal wrote back saying that my paper was under review and the referee was not answering. I was thus waiting.

But after more than two years (about 26 months), the journal sent me this:

  By a QUICK view on your paper, it is not interested for our journal and so we reject your paper

I think they could have answered earlier. Unfortunately, now my work is still not published and some authors published my results in another journal. So, I want to complain to the journal, and possibly get them eliminated from Thomson's lists. How can I achieve this?

First, to quickly address your explicit question in boldface, here's the official words from Thomson Reuters regarding their journal selection process for Web of Science and annual review:

http://wokinfo.com/essays/journal-selection-process/

While they apparently take timeliness and peer review very seriously, my impression is that a single instance of slow external review is not a strong enough reason to remove a journal. As this recent blog post on Nature shows, they do ban journals rather aggressively when they feel necessary. But those dropped journals are serious offenders of abuse and are clearly hurting Thomson Reuters' business.

Every researcher experiences unfair rejection in some way or another once in a while. I understand that it is very unfortunate that this has happened at a very early stage of your career. But this seems to be a lost cause at this point. And if you are sure that it was unjustifiable and if you do want to take some action, the best you could do seems to be let Editor in Chief know exactly what happened by writing a letter from an objective viewpoint in polite language and in sober tone and ask them to consider what they might be able to do to improve contributor experience. If you do not receive a satisfactory reply from them, you might consider reporting everything to the publisher that owns the journal.

But before you take any action, you should ask opinions from experienced researchers in your fields, such as your advisor. This is very important because different fields have different cultures in academia.

I assume that you are enrolled in a Ph.D. program in mathematics; I saw your post on MathOverflow. If this is the case, you might want to take a look at the most recent yearly report by American Mathematical Society on how long it typically takes for a paper to get accepted:

http://www.ams.org/notices/201210/rtx121001473p.pdf

As you can see, the median time from submission to final acceptance varies greatly from journal to journal. You might want to notice how it takes a long time to get your paper reviewed by some of the most respected mathematics journals. For instance, Annals of Mathematics, which is arguably the most prestigious journal in mathematics, takes 24 months on average for review. The Memoirs of American Mathematical Society averagely takes more than 18 months from submission to acceptance. Granted that the practice of these journals is more of an exception than the norm, two years of review is certainly not unheard of in mathematics. So, while I tend to believe that your paper could have been reviewed much more quickly because a typical paper certainly does not require two years, it is impossible for us to tell if it was unjust or not without more context.

As for the priority issue you brought up, if it is in mathematics, I must say that you should not be surprised if you do not receive much sympathy. Reading your post, it appears that you did not make your preprint available to other members of the mathematics community before or soon after submission. Because mathematics has a much longer review process than other fields, it is quite common and, I think, very important to disseminate your results as soon as possible by, for example, uploading your preprint on arXiv or directly sending it through email to people you are sure will be interested. In fact, some journals explicitly encourage authors to upload their preprints on arXiv upon submission.

With that said, I understand that arXiv and other means of "pre-publication" are not for everyone. In mathematics, for example, one Fields Medalist mentions unpopularity of arXiv among East Asian authors he noticed during his little experiment on arXiv usage. As someone who was born and raised in Japan and received a Ph.D. from a Japanese university, I know how people may have their own valid reasons not to make their preprint public. You may have some strong belief or policy regarding science publication models as well. I din not use arXiv when I was a graduate student in Japan, either. However, you should not complain when someone "beats you to it" when you could prevent it by following the normal practice in the community.

Now, if you managed to read this wall of text this much, that means that you are the good kind of person who can stay calm and be in control of yourself in a tough situation. And, obviously, you have good math skills with which you proved new theorems worth publishing. So, if there is one thing I am sure of, it is that you have been heading in the right direction as a graduate student.

If you feel like the journal caused an unnecessary delay or "gap year" of some sort to your career, I guess you're right. But personally I try not to overthink, and try to think it's just another unavoidable glitch that often gets us out of the blue in our lives. (Notice the word "try." I fail very often.) You know, there are so many horror stories like yours out there in mathematics... (And never ask why I've been doing a postdoc for so many years!) It sucks for sure. But probably the best you can do now is talk to your advisor, who is there to give you advice anyway, and get back to your math life as soon as possible to prove more theorems. Good luck!


Is it correct to get a scholarship to do your final degree work? I applied for a public call for applications in which scholarships are awarded for the final year of my studies. The purpose of the fellowship is to promote the health sciences in other university studies.

Specifically, my studies are computer science and the project is to develop a web application to visualize medical images.

I have also discovered that the process of researching and learning new concepts motivates me. However, the aspect of having the responsibility of programming the application frustrates me, fills me with anxiety and causes discomfort, since I am actually a student who is finishing my degree studies, and it is the first time that I am doing an application for real use.

In short, I like the subject of using medical images, I hate programming the application because I get frustrated quickly, because I encounter difficulties with mathematical concepts, graphics or web programming that I have not been taught during my studies. Still, I do love the purpose for which the application is intended: to help the students and the veterinary teacher.

Considering I've already been paid my scholarship, is it correct that I've been given it?

EDIT:

There is a condition which states that tha maximum development time is a year since the scholarship's resolution which was on 10th november 2017.

Is it correct that they pay it before the app has been developed?

If this is a final year project then the required output is as a learning exercise, which may not need the App to be completed and working.  But if this is a project for an external company then completion is probably the final objective.

If the scholarship was awarded to support the final year then yes, it is correct.

If the scholarship was awarded against the completion of the App, then you need to complete the App...

Does very much depend on the conditions of the scholarship though - which you need to check as necessary.


When applying to grad school, where should I discuss my medical issues that led to poor grades during my first two years? I graduated this December from a major public university with a major in social services. I received a 3.02. I have about four Ws on my transcript and two FS, and quite a few Cs. Two semesters in my early years of school I did very poorly due to a medical issue I was dealing with. When you look at my past 4 semesters though I have done quite well and clearly have an upward trajectory of increasing my gpa each year. Would you write an extra statement to the admissions team stating why you received those bad grades those 2 semesters or put it in your personal statement of intent....or just let it slide and hope for the best. I was dealing with extreme dizziness and neurological symptoms due to undiagnosed hypothyroidism at the time.
Other than that I have multiple internships, practicum experiences, and volunteer work, and will be receiving great letters of recommendation. I am applying to a Counseling Master's Program and do believe this will help a lot!

Medical issues, especially during your earlier years, are worth explaining in your SOP BUT it's not worth making an extra statement/essay.  You don't want to be overdramatic with it, rather maybe a line or two in the sense of the whole SOP/application.  GPA is a bit low, but you have a strong upward trend, plus all the issues were in your earlier years so that will definitely help.
In addition, are any of your recommenders aware of this?  In addition to adding an again, VERY small addendum addressing this, your recommenders could also address it as well, making a small addendum in their letters saying the C's/F's/W's earlier on in your undergraduate are in no way a reflection of your ability to succeed in a graduate program or conduct research.
Remember that GPA is only one factor.  Your experiences as well as your later years and, most importantly, your letters of recommendation all have a significant part of your application package as well.


When can I safely use CC-BY license on arXiv? On arXiv one can license a preprint on one of the following (see also a note on arXiv on licenses):

arXiv.org perpetual, non-exclusive license to distribute this article (Minimal rights required by arXiv.org. Select this unless you understand the implications of other licenses.)
Creative Commons Attribution license
Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-ShareAlike license
Creative Commons Public Domain Declaration

For cases when it is fine to submit a paper on arXiv.org perpetual (see also Does publishing a paper on arXiv prevent me from submitting it to a non-open access journal?), when I can safely use CC-BY (Creative Commons Attribution license)?

Ideally, I would use it all the time, as it is the most permissible (=open) license, which requires attribution. (However, I used it only once, it a case where I don't intend to send it to a journal; so, except for that case, when one should (or shouldn't) be afraid of using CC-BY on arXiv?)

EDIT: Here the emphasis is on arXiv perpetual vs CC, not on choosing between CC licenses.

Using a CC-BY license on arxiv.org will be fine whenever you don't need to retain exclusive rights. CC-BY is a non-exclusive license, and you are free to grant as many non-exclusive licenses as you wish. However, you won't be able to grant a exclusive license thereafter, which is what most commercial publishers are looking for. The typical "transfer of copyright" would essentially be an exclusive license in these cases.

If you intend to publish the paper submitted to arxiv.org with an open access publisher, it should generally work with a CC-BY license. Most open access publishers require only a non-exclusive license to publish a paper, so there would be no conflict here. It may however not be possible to go to a publisher which requires either an exclusive license or a copyright transfer afterwards.

Interestingly, a copyright transfer may be less restrictive than an exclusive license in this case. In principle, it should be possible to transfer copyright even if a license have already been granted to someone else (that's how a company would buy software from another company that has already been licensed). So, why not try the following with your next paper:

Submit it to arxiv under a CC-BY license.
Submit to a commercial publisher, and add a statement like this to the copyright transfer agreement:

  "This agreement is with the understanding that a non-revocable, non-exclusive license under the terms CC-BY has been granted to a arxiv.org."

I wonder how they'd react...


Do researchers actually read all of the papers they cite? I am a PhD student (middle stage). I have read only 2-research papers from last six seven months. I have seen some research papers in which they have cited around 12-15 research papers and I think this is the case with every research paper. To me it seems unrealistic to read 12-15 research papers with the details I have read first two.

  Question : What fraction of the cited papers has the typical author actually read?

There are a couple of background issues worth addressing before actually answering your main question.  Also what I say is I think fairly typical for math and theoretical CS; I guess some but not all is similar for other fields.

You’ll get faster at reading papers as you gain experience.  Much, much faster.  I remember in my first couple of years of grad school feeling similarly to you: reading a paper was a big undertaking — it could take weeks of work to get through a particular paper.  Now that’s very rare —  even a pretty thorough read of a paper (e.g. for a review) is typically under a day’s work.  Longer than that comes only occasionally, if I need to really thoroughly understand an unusually substantial and novel paper.  Mostly, it’s just being more familiar with the landscape the papers are working in, and the techniques used.  Also, partly, reading papers is itself a learned skill.

You’ll learn how to read a paper in less than full detail (and when that’s  appropriate).  Again, I remember first reading papers, I would go through them line by line and make sure I absolutely understood every step.  Now, I usually don’t need to, for multiple reasons.  One is that I no longer need all the details in order to follow the general outline, because I understand the big picture better.  Another is that I’m better at judging in advance which details I will or won’t need to know: e.g. if it looks like some proof is a routine calculation, then I’ll skip it, knowing that I can come back to it later if I ever need a similar calculation and have trouble doing it myself.  Another is that I may be able to see in advance (e.g. from the introduction) that some sections will be more relevant to my work than others.  And, of course, I can skip or skim parts that recall background material that I already know.

So, coming back now to answer your main question: The actual proportions will vary greatly, but typically, authors will have read all the cited papers at least in part, but will not have read most of them in full detail.  That said, reading 12–15 papers thoroughly isn’t infeasible by any means.

Looking at the bibliography a recent 2-author paper of mine with about 30 references in the bibliography, they break down very roughly as:

30%: I’ve read these papers/books carefully in their entirety at some point in the past.
40%: I’ve read parts of these papers/books thoroughly (including the parts relevant to what we’re citing them for), and at least skimmed all or most of the rest.
20%: I’ve just dipped into these papers/books for specific results we needed to cite (plus relevant background); I’ve not read most of the rest.
10%: I’ve not looked seriously at these ones at all; my co-author is responsible for the citations to them.

This is I think fairly typical for me; but I also know some authors for whom I suspect those numbers would typically look more like 10-30-40-20, and others for whom they’d be more like 80–20–0–0.


In a scholarship application that asks about "overcoming challenges," does this refer to financial challenges or other kinds? I am applying for a university scholarship program, and as part of the application I have to write some essays but I don't understand what they want exactly in the first essay. The question is written like this:

  Household information and Statement of Need

  Describe the challenges you have faced in your path to education until
  this point. Please include the following:

  Who has supported your academic achievements until now? (financially and/or other)
  Which challenges did you overcome during your secondary education?

So my question is: when they ask "Which challenges did you overcome during your secondary education?" are they only asking about financial issues/challenges or also other kind of challenges?

Is it OK if I talk about family problems(non financial) that have negatively affected some moments of my education?

I would like also to ask if anyone could give me a link to an article or some other other online resource that has tips to writing a good essay, I have already googled but I can't find anything very useful.

They're leaving the question open-ended intentionally. They will use your answer to judge whether you're a good fit for the school's culture.

Generally when you see questions like this for things like admissions essays or in interviews, the interviewer wants to give you an honest and complete answer. You can discuss any kinds of challenges here, be they personal, financial, or strictly academic, but only bring the challenge up if the way you responded to it either taught you something or reflects a positive character trait.

The goal for your essay should be to show the reader why you deserve the scholarship or why you are most likely to use that money in a better way than another recipient might be. Because of this, keep in mind the kind of scholarship it is. If it's a minority scholarship, for example, remember that the scholarship is, at its core, designed to help underprivileged kids have the opportunity to go to school, and those kinds of scholarships are especially relevant to bright kids with decent test scores who come from places with limited academic resources or families with low income. That kind of situation might give you all sorts of stuff to talk about, from disrespectful kids and xenophobic teachers to insufficient access to technology and school supplies. If you can show that you faced some or all of these kinds of challenges but still got a 29 on your ACT (because you worked hard and applied yourself, naturally), the Minority Office might be more impressed with your application. Review the mission statement of the department that will be receiving the recommendation before writing it, and always tweak essays for other departments before you send out the letters.


Is it immoral to show new students how to use Wolfram Alpha? Currently, I'm working as an assistant at the mathematics department of my university. My job consists of sitting for 20 hours a week in an office to which students come with doubts regarding all the basic math courses.

Today, for example, I was solving a limit in a class full of engineering freshmen. After I solved it, I checked the answer in Wolfram in front of the students and I recommended the website, as well as other useful sites such as Desmos, or Khan Academy.

My afterthoughts were: "what if they start using it when they're not supposed to? (i.e. exams and such)". Does the act of recommending such a site carry any moral consequence?

I always like to show the students Wolfram Alpha in freshman math courses. (Many will already know about it, whether you show them or not.)

There are several reasons for this. The first is that it's a useful tool, both for checking solutions to homeworks, and also for later in life.

But the more important reason is that many students are skeptical of why they have to take a course in calculus. I double down on their skepticism by demonstrating to them that a computer can solve most computational questions on a calculus exam in about 0.05 seconds, and can even "show its work". Having gotten their attention, I now have a good opportunity to make my case for the value of a math education.

As far as exams go, I recommend prohibiting the use of all electronic devices. Some students will cheat on their homework, but that will be true no matter what and in the end they are cheating themselves.


Can a research group be formed without a PhD in charge? In my place of work, which has a very incipient progress in the field of research in Computer Science, has occurred this dichotomic situation:

It has arrived one lecturer that has finished his PhD students in a foreign country. Because he has some research already on the way from his doctoral studies, he has formed a research group within our Faculty.
There is another lecturer that has only a Master degree, also in CS, but he has some good ideas but he suffers from imposter syndrome.

In this situation the former group minimizes the attempt of the second group to form a research group; stating things like "a research group to be successful should always be led by a doctoral graduate if not is doomed"

The question is, is it needed to have a doctoral researcher inside a research group (sorry for the redundancy)? or in what ways we should encourage the formation of research groups even though they are not lead by a PhD graduate?

A PhD is a degree supposed to develop (and later demonstrate) the skill of being capable and ready to do independent research. The degree to which that is achieved can vary massively, depending on institution and supervisor.

It is quite possible (and not at all improbable) that a non-PhD person can outshine the PhD person, but, per default, the latter enjoys a priori the expectation that they know more about the process of doing research than the former. However, this is no reason at all not to form a group of interested people, with or without PhD. A PhD member is not a guarantee of success and the lack of one does not presage doom.

The case you mention seems to be of someone who does not want to see a competing group being created (depending on the convention of your location). That being said, make sure you have knowledgeable people in the group. The reason why many countries have a research group led by a professor (not just a PhD) is that the latter not only know how to do research but have had a broad exposure to many methods and perspectives.

Good luck!


The importance of having a "big name" as your thesis advisor When it comes to postdoc positions in mathematics in the US, does it make any difference for the hiring committees if your thesis adviser is a big name (say, someone like Gromov or Milnor)?

I'm surely not the most qualified person on this site to answer, but I have been on a postdoc hiring committee in pure mathematics and I quite disagree with the existing answers. The single most important factor is going to be your letters of recommendation (with second on the list being your publications and preprints). I think having a famous advisor is going to be of minor importance in comparison; most people understand that also great mathematicians sometimes have students that are just mediocre, so that it's no great predictor of future success. In fact I heard in a sense the opposite argument being made, that if an applicant from a smaller university with a less famous advisor has strong letters from big names, then this is more impressive than if a student at a "top" university had the exact same letters.


CV for post-docs: PhD vs PhD student? As a PhD student who starts his last year, I will soon start to look for post-docs. In this process, I will update my Curriculum Vitae. But as a title of this CV should I put "PhD in XXXXXX" or "PhD Student in XXXXXX" ?

Until you have your PhD officially, your CV should list "PhD Candidate" or "PhD Student," depending on your proper status. In your education section, you should list the month you expect to graduate (and you should say "(expected)" or similar next to the date).


Why would an academic write a textbook for free? Recently, I became aware of a Java programming textbook
Introduction to Programming Using Java, Seventh Edition
which is to my surprise, free as in:

  The most recent version of this book is always available, at no charge, for downloading and for on-line use.

Question: Why would the author (David J. Eck) make this textbook free?

I have found that almost always,
authors of academic textbooks prefer to make money
from sales of their textbooks,
rather than writing a textbook which is available freely without cost.
(I don't have any statistics to back up this assertion.
However, throughout my undergrad and my PhD studies,
in about 95% of the courses which I took,
the prescribed textbook was published by an academic publisher such as
McGraw-Hill, Pearson or Springer.)

Closely related question:
Massimo Ortolano
claims in this comment that most authors would not be able to make much money
from sales of academic textbooks they have written.
Can someone give me an estimated amount of earnings per textbook sold?

As the author of this particular free textbook, I can say that the previous answers have covered things pretty well.  "Introduction to programming using Java" started in 1996 as a set of class notes written in HTML with embedded Java applets -- which all seemed pretty exciting in the heady early days of the Internet.  I had published an earlier textbook in the usual way, and made not much money from it, which is true of the large majority of published textbooks.  I had recently been promoted to full professor, possibly the most secure job in the world where the only further promotion available to me would move me into (shudder) administration, so it would make little difference to my career if I self-published a book instead of submitting it to a regular publisher.

I lost creative control over my regularly published textbook.  The copyright was assigned to the publisher until it goes out of print, which it will probably never do in these days of print-on-demand.  There has never been a second edition.  My Java textbook, on the other hand, has gone through seven versions and has been updated fairly regularly.  I get the ego boost of hearing from people all over the world who have read it (something I can never seem to get most of my own students to do).  The web site still gets hundreds of visits every day.  It has certainly had more impact on the world than if I were selling it.  And if someone doesn't like it, I can politely point out that they can write their own textbook, or even make a modified version of mine.

So, my main motivation was to write a textbook that I could use in my own courses.  Selling it would make me very little profit.  And since I use free software all the time, it's also a way that I could give back something to the open source / creative commons community.


Purpose of humanities PhD interview for less prestigious program? everyone—

A quick and vague question. I've applied to 9 English PhD programs this cycle at institutions that vary greatly in prestige. Only one of them, the least prestigious program, requires a brief video interview for "finalists" (about 15 minutes), in which the candidate discusses his/her interest in the school, academic interests, and career plans with a member of the department.

I was just selected for this yesterday, and the interview is tomorrow! I wanted to know if anyone has any insight about the true purpose of such an interview, which is rare in the humanities, and seems redundant considering that the proposed topics of discussion are all covered at length in my application. It's especially bizarre considering it's not an especially prestigious program/their funding isn't great/etc., so such a step seems less necessary than it would at very competitive programs.

It occurrs to me that they may want to ensure that finalists are genuinely interested in their program before potentially wasting offers on candidates who regard the school as a backup? Of course I'm taking the interview prep seriously, but any extra insight that would help me be more strategic would be much appreciated.

One possible purpose of the interview, from their point of view, is that having an actual conversation may help you become more interested in joining their program.  So it may be partly for recruitment as well as screening.

This would also explain why a less prestigious program would want to do it: they have a harder time recruiting.


How to justify an application for research funding if the only cost is my own academic or intellectual labour (without any equipments) etc? I am applying for a small research grant.
However, I would not need to spend the funds for anything project-related (e.g. equipments, access to databases, travel costs etc). I only need to spend time reading related works, code a bit, and write a paper.
In other words, I would take take the fund as a salary for my academic labour.
Now, the application form asks me to explain how I plan to use the funding. What would be the best way to respond to this question when I only incur the personal costs covering the time for my intellectual work?

Now, the application form asks me to explain how I plan to use the funding. What would be the best way to respond to this question when I only incur the personal costs covering the time for my intellectual work?

Funding will cover x% of monthly salary costs for the PI, over the duration of the project. (The remaining y% will be funded by the PI's university to perform duties beyond the project scope.)

I only need to spend time reading related works, code a bit, and write a paper.

Those activities will require office space, IT equipment, etc. Those expenses can typically be included.


How to deal with (ex-) supervisor not meeting promise to write reference letter Before actually submitting anything, I contacted one of my ex-supervisors and he agreed to write a reference letter for me. That was almost a month ago. Then, the first time he received the invitation to submit a reference for me (invitation self-generated from the online application system), he promised he will submit it "soon" with enthusiasm.

However, days went by, after two weeks of the initial invitation, nothing was received. I therefore sent a reminder to him and he again said he will submit it in one to two days (he did mention he was a bit busy). Now a week has passed and still nothing. The deadline for getting the reference is closing soon (in two weeks).

What should I do? I have options to send him an email reminder personally (I cannot call him because we live in different countries right now). Or I can re-send an invitation via the application system. Which one would be more polite, as well as more effective in getting him to actually write it?

I'll guess you have done about all you can other than send a final notice very close to the deadline. The prof is probably targeting that "drop dead" date and continuous reminders may just get in the way. But a note on the next to last day would be good.

You might also start to think about other options. Who else might be able to do this for you?


How to politely turn down others' request for collaboration? When I first started my PhD, I would grab every opportunity to collaborate with others because there weren't many and I wanted to learn as much as possible. However, as I become a senior PhD student, more and more people invited me to collaborate with them which can be quite overwhelming sometimes and I found it hard to turn down these requests. I wonder if there is any way to politely turn down these requests, especially ones from researchers senior to me?

Thank you so much for keeping me in mind for this. Even though the idea sounds exciting, I'm currently swamped with work, and cannot join a new collaboration at this point. I'm very sorry!

Depending on whether you see the chance to collaborate in the future, or you just want to get rid of them: You can also add that they can contact you again at some later point, or even that you will contact them.


How to withdraw your paper from an open access journal where it has been accepted? My paper got accepted in a mediocre open access journal. However later I found out that its publishing fees was too high.

What would be the correct way of asking a withdrawal of your article from the journal?

If it has been accepted but you have not yet signed any sort of agreement, then it's easy in theory: you just tell the editor that you have decided to withdraw the paper.  They might be unhappy, but you have a right to do this (both legally and according to academic norms).

If the paper has already been published, then there may not be anything you can do.  Retracting a published paper is serious business, done only in cases of serious error or unethical behavior.

If you have already agreed to some sort of license allowing publication and paid (or agreed to pay) but the paper has not yet been published, then you should move fast.  Legally the journal can go ahead and publish, and they may decide to do so, but your chances of convincing them before they publish the paper are higher than after they publish it.

There have been stories of unethical journals publishing papers that have been withdrawn and then demanding money.  If that happens, then it is serious misbehavior on the part of the journal (and proves you were wise to withdraw the paper).


How to find online discussion groups on research topics which are relatively less popular How could someone who has just enrolled in a phd or started a research could find online discussion groups, especially if the topic is relatively less popular.(e.g How to find research or discussion group working in privacy aware learning specially differential privacy).

If you are in a small niche area of a field then such groups aren't likely to be very visible. It might even be that none exist.
But, if there are productive people in that field who are still working  actively, you can contact a few of them and ask what might be available. Recent papers can be your guide. It might even be that retired folks know of active researchers, perhaps among their own students, who can help.
And, consider starting such a group yourself if you can get a few interested people to agree. It might pay dividends in the future.


Grade complaints: Master's thesis I received my master's thesis grade today, with comments "weak and insufficient analysis". My supervisor read it and checked it on multiple occasions (before submission) and said it is excellent, even though the topic is complex.  He suggested to focuse on graphs, figures etc (visual presentation). I was also requesting additional resources to provide more thorough analysis, the request was declined due to:  "it is only a master's thesis, so what I am doing is more than enough". I also know he is the only one on faculty to specialise on this topic, so that is definately his comments. Whom and how do I  address these issues?

Presumably, your master's thesis was graded by academics other than your supervisor. Since your supervisor read it and checked it on multiple occasions and considered it excellent. In particular, your supervisor advised that your analysis is more than enough (as opposed to weak and insufficient, as remarked by your graders). (I don't understand what is meant by: that is definately his comments [since] he is the only one on faculty to specialise on this topic. Firstly, what comments? Secondly, non-specialists can evaluate your work.)

  Whom and how do I address these issues?

It seems your supervisor is on your side. I suggest meeting with them and discussing your grade. Assuming your supervisor believes your grade is unfair, they may be willing to champion any appeal and guide you through the process.

Beyond your supervisor, you need to follow whatever appeals procedure your institute has in place. I strongly suggest seeking the advice and support of a friendly faculty member, preferably someone you know reasonably well and someone who either knows the procedure well or is well-connected enough to find someone who is.


Professor says he won't report my cheating if I admit it in writing. Is it a trap? I cheated on a homework assignment. The professor found out. I am afraid of what is going to happen. I know I should face the consequences. I am thinking about just withdrawing from my PhD program now, before his complaint gets to the dean.

He said that he would not report if I write an email admitting it and saying that I would never do it again. But this seems a way to get me admitting it with proof. I already admitted in front of him. I don’t know why he needs an email saying that.

Should I provide this e-mail? Is it a trap?

You betrayed your professor with this cheating behavior and lost his trust. But trust from others is the most important value in academia and in science. It is a necessary, but not sufficient, condition for any kind of research in any scientific domain. It is necessary for any homework (the goal of any homework is just transmission of skills and of knowledge, nothing else; correcting and grading home-works is the worst part of any teaching job). And when you read any research paper, you have to trust its author. If you cannot, the author committed academic dishonesty. Unethical behavior is the number-one enemy of science.

Your professor is responding by asking you some email (that is some formal confession). He is likely to not use it now but could use that later.

I would have behaved as he did. He is giving you a last chance. Be grateful to him!

We all make mistakes, but you should try hard to avoid repeating yours. Errare humanum est

Your past behavior (described in your question) was unethical, not an adult one and incompatible with any PhD studies.

Most of us cheated at least once in our studies. My best teachers in French high school (collège) told me: "don't try to cheat, at your age, I cheated more than you can now". And I'll be 60 years old in August 2019.

  I am thinking about just withdraw my PhD right know before his complain gets to the dean.

Doing a PhD is hard work, and you'll make a lot of mistakes. They are part of the job (and that is why I like so much the "Philosophical degree" in US academia: in France I am just a "Doctor" of computer science, but the only thing I really know is that I know almost nothing; read more on the etymology of the Doctor word).

NB: I am not a native English speaker, since I am French. During my own PhD I did pay for professional help from a psychotherapist, and as a human being (probably as old as your own father), I believe you should do likewise, at least to increase your soft skills and probably to be able to achieve your PhD. It is a really hard journey.

I welcome any private email about this question (cited by its URL) and my answer above if it is written in French by a non-French native speaker.


For a student, what is the optimal usage of a solution manual? During coursework if a solution manual is available for the textbook, it is always a huge bonus for the student. While the student is exposed to a variety of relevant applications and tricks in the problems, the solution manual ensures the student's hard work spent trying out the problems does not go waste. The solution manual's availability is akin to the presence of a "Cheat" button in crossword applets - the earlier you press the less you try, but still the presence of the button is useful as such.

What are some useful tips for a student who wants to utilise the solution manual optimally?

Never use the solution manual before trying everything else; talk to friends, visit the professor, go to class and listen (!), check the internet. Once you use the solution manual for a problem, the potential gain from that problem is significantly and irrecoverably reduced.
Use the solution manual to check your work. (Duh.)
For problems you aren't planning on solving, you can use the solutions manual to create flashcards and other learning aides (if the course material is anemable to such a construct).
If you have a friend/roommate/spouse/trained monkey who can compare your answers to the manual for you, such that you don't actually read through the manual, that may be useful for certain topics.
You can make some good money selling it when the semester is over :)


Arranging a visit to a professor you do not know yet I am a PhD student in mathematics and I’d like to visit professor X (whom I don’t know personally), as he’s an expert in my field and could really help me with some passages in my research. I have quite a few questions:

How to approach professor X to ask if I can visit him and what sort of information should I provide?
When PhD students visit academics, what happens usually? I mean, would professor X become a sort of supervisor for the time of the visit, or would it just be that me and professor X would mostly be in the same place at the same time and able to chat a bit if the opportunity arises?
How long do visits last, usually? Would I be a student at professor X’s university during the time of my visit? Would I have any academic requirements (e.g. to give talks at seminars, etc.)?
Professor X is in a different country than I am. Are professors based in a different country than a potential visiting student more reluctant to let students visit them? If so, why?

There's no definite answer to any of your questions. All of these details depend a lot on the professor, the circumstances (e.g., funding), and you:

  How to approach professor X to ask if I can visit him and what sort of information should I provide?

I would assume a mail is sufficient. However, if you don't know the prof personally, and you are not overly well-known in your community yet, it may be better to ask your advisor to establish contact. Professors get many mails from prospective students on various levels, with various intends. Those mails tend to get discarded quickly and unceremoniously.

I don't know what information would be required, initially probably almost none, except who you are and what you would like to work on with the professor. At a later point, details of how this visit would be funded may become an important discussion item (e.g., who pays your travel? who pays your hotel / apartment? if you are an university employee, who pays YOU during your visit?). Don't expect your host to arrange funding - this is something that you / your advisor will need to arrange, and just agree with the host.

  When PhD students visit academics, what happens usually? I mean, would professor X become a sort of supervisor for the time of the visit, or would it just be that me and professor X would mostly be in the same place at the same time and able to chat a bit if the opportunity arises?

I have seen both happen. Clearly, in the second case, the visit is often close to worthless. However, in most cases, the truth is somewhere in the middle. The prof meets a few times with the visitor, and "appoints" one or more of his own students with a matching profile /research interests as a contact point and collaborator for the visit. You should not have too high expectations of how much time your host can really invest into you (and not into, say, his own students or his own research).

  How long do visits last, usually? Would I be a student at professor X’s university during the time of my visit? Would I have any academic requirements (e.g. to give talks at seminars, etc.)?

Depends. I have so far done two research visits, one as a short as 2 weeks, one for 6 weeks. I know of others who have done visits for up to 6 months. You usually have little academic requirements, and you are not usually considered a student of the host institution (at least for visits that are shorter than one term). Giving a talk is sometimes necessary as part of your funding arrangements. For instance, in my second stay, my travel was funded by the host institution over the vehicle that they officially invited me as an expert speaker for their seminar series (so that they could formally pay for my travel, which they could not do for a visit). In my first visit, the expectation of the funding source was that at some point a paper would be published related to the visit (clearly not within those two weeks, but at some point). Further, I had to write a brief report.

  Professor X is in a different country than I am. Are professors based in a different country than a potential visiting student more reluctant to let students visit them? If so, why?

Not typically, however, finding funding may be even more difficult. However, both of my visits have been cross-country, in one case cross-continents, so it definitely can be done.


How to deal with a student who harasses the (inexperienced) teacher during class? I am a young teacher at college. I have to go way too long, I know but I have the following problem.

In one of my classes, I have this guy who pecks at me for everything I say. He is surely conceited, but it hurts like hell when he makes fun of me in front of the whole class.

However, I take no note of it in class, but later I feel very sad. This makes me frightened to go to that class at all.

He is overconfident and imposing and seems to have got a big gang behind him. He is a threat and he disturbs me. Please help me tackle this situation.

As a first step you could ask one of your more experienced colleagues to observe your teaching. Let the students know the colleague is there to evaluate your teaching. While it is obviously not a formal evaluation, it is an evaluation of how you handle a difficult teaching situation. You want to tell the students that you are being evaluated so that the trouble makers feel like they can sabotage you. If they do not know why they are being observed, the trouble makers may behave better. The goal is not to "catch" the student behaving badly, it is to have an example of bad behaviour so you and the evaluator can work through possible responses after the class.

Hopefully the trouble makers will try and "undermine" you and act out. With first hand knowledge the colleague may have specific suggestions of how to deal with the student. If the student does not act out you can then discuss the types of behaviour the student shows with the colleague.

Ideally the observer would be from your department, but if it is difficult to find someone, the observer does not need to be from your department nor understand the material you are teaching. They do not need to commit to the entire lecture, 15-30 minutes is often enough. The key thing is they need to be experienced enough to be able to provide suggestions and someone you respect enough to take the suggestions on board. If they understand the material even better, but you want someone that you respect with the needed experience.


Reuse figure from research I want to reuse a figure from research with an Attribution 4.0 International license; I want to contact the author to ask his permission. However, I couldn't find any way to contact him. What should I do?

Looks like you don't need any permission.  See https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/


How do I prepare for a postdoc position with requirements in working with the theoretical basis of the software, which I have never worked with? I am 5th year PhD, about to submit my thesis in few months and defend in around September this year. My computational materials science PhD thesis involved using a commercial software (ABAQUS) to model a machining problem. I had to come up with material models and write python codes to build new geometries and stuff. I did decent in my PhD with 3 publications in decent journals and few in preparation.

Now, I learnt the theory behind the working of the commercial software while beginning my work. I did it entirely through self study. However, my PhD thesis did not involve any manipulation or working with the actual theoretical formulation of the software. So, I don't have any working experience with the formulation of (Finite element method) FEA form of a problem and implementing it.

Now, all the jobs or postdoc positions in FEA application requires one to be able to solve a problem by hand, compare with analytical solutions, be proficient in implementing FEA weak forms into the commercial software...and so on. I don't know if I would be able to do it when required as I have not worked with it till now.

I don't know if I am even eligible to call myself a PhD as I feel unconfident/ashamed in my abilities to be called an expert in the numerical analysis field. What do I do?

Three quick thoughts:

Discuss it with your advisor. They might know of more suitable positions, or have field-specific advice.
During your PhD (and before), you should have improved the skill of learning things on your own. This will be useful in a postdoc or maybe an industrial position. Just don't be afraid to use it.
It seems you have some time left before the defense. Use it to start learning the software and skills you need. Consider starting a new research project where you'd have to use these methods (nothing like learning by doing!), or just reimplementing an existing paper.

Good luck!


Is it possible for research paper to have a similarity of 2 out of 100 using iThenticate? I'm involved in TPC (technical program committee) task for some international conference. In one paper I'm reviewing, I noticed that the similarity index is just 2% using iThenticate which seems impractical (for me).
Though the type/context of the paper is an essay paper, discussing current status and challenges of some phenomenon/technology/topic, there like no graphs and discussion of numerical/simulation results. I'm suspecting whether the authors  are trying to cheat somehow?
Any tips how to proceed since this is my first TPC task?

I don't think I've ever seen an iThenticate paper with 2% similarity. Less than 10% is rare enough.

However: so what? Low similarity isn't a problem, only high similarity is. The latter implies plagiarism, but the former ... I can't think of any way the authors can cheat by having low similarity. If it's a fake paper generated by SciGen then perhaps it would have abnormally low similarity, but you've already ruled that out since you understood the paper. It's also presumably possible to force a paper to have low similarity as well, simply by continuously rewriting the parts that iThenticate flags.

I'd assess the paper on its content and not worry about the similarity.


What is expected in my academic CV as a new PhD student? I just started my PhD a few months back after completing a MSc. I've been asked for a CV but I don't know what to put in it, and various templates are hard to use because:

I don't have any papers nor have I reviewed anything
I haven't been to any conferences
I haven't received any competitive awards or research grants
I haven't been on academic visits

In other words, I'm in the early stages of my academic career, I've done well enough to get where I am, but I haven't yet done anything that I can drop into a standard format academic CV (except for my education).

How can I write my academic CV when a standard format for those with a more advanced career looks, well, skeletal?
What would be expected on an academic CV for someone just starting a PhD? Is literally just handful of lines acceptable?

Write your CV as-if you hadn't started your PhD. As such, list the educational institutes you've attended, e.g.,

2015 -- 2017 Distinction, Master of science, University II
2010 -- 2015 Grade, Bachelor of science, University I
2002 -- 2010 High School qualification, School

And list what subjects you studied underneath at least the first two. (It's  probably no longer relevant what you studied at school.)

Mention your current position too. E.g.,

2017 -- present Doctor of philosophy, University III

And give a compressed summary of your research objectives underneath. (It should appear above the other institutes.)


How to cite "obvious" things or make them credible? I'm writing my thesis and I want to emphasize that the importance of energy, especially electrical energy, has increased tremendously and we are living in an information era which is fueled by electrical energy.

How would I make this sound credible?

There are two claims here, one about increasing reliance on electrical energy, the other about the information age. You can operationalize both and look for data that supports the claim. The first claim can be operationalized  as electricity consumption (worldwide or in the OECD), over time. There's data published, for example, by the international energy agency. The second claim can be operationalized as growth in petaflops, available computers or smartphones per household, people having internet access, you name it.

Another, rhetorically nicer but less scientific, at least less scientific-sounding, approach to 'proving' the obvious is to use telling and vivid examples:

  When a large-scale electrical storm  went through northern Virginia on
  29 June, electrical load in one of more than 10 Amazon data centers in
  the region failed to successfully transfer to generator backup.
  Uninterruptible power supply (UPS) serving that particular circuit
  eventually ran out of battery power and servers began losing power
  around 8pm PDT. This caused service interruptions for many online
  businesses -- including popular ones like Netflix and Pinterest
  (liberally quoted from here).

Also, there is this IEEE paper on worldwide energy needs of information technology.


Reviewers asked me to make my conclusion more "analytical" - how? The editors of my peer-reviewed article asked me to write a more analytical conclusion, one that is more conclusive...Any pointers on how I can make it more analytical and less of just a synthesis?

PS: My field is educational science and my article is part empirical, part conceptual

Look at other related articles, particularly those in the journal you submitted the article to.  This will give you some idea of the appropriate length and content of a conclusions section.

It is difficult to give you specific advice without knowing more about your topic and results.  However, when I write the conclusion to an article I generally try to explain several specific things.  First, I summarize the major results of the article.  If any of the results resolve significant standing questions in the field, I point this out specifically, and reiterate why these answers are important.  Second, I explain what further research needs to be done in this area, with specific emphasis on how the current paper affects our expectations for what will be useful to study in the future.  Third, if there is a specific avenue of future research that I intend to follow up, I mention it.


Should my supervisor acknowledge me in his recent paper? In my chemistry undergraduate I did a project with my supervisor, I worked on it for around 8 months. Around a year later they published a paper on this same topic, after my project was handed in they asked for more details about certain elements that weren't clear in my final draft and I helped the best I could.

To be clear, none of my data was published in the paper and the research that was published was leaps and bounds more advanced anything I did. But I feel so they perhaps used my research to rule out certain things that didn't work or need repeating. Do you think my name should be mentioned anywhere in the paper as just an acknowledgement?

What deserves acknowledgment and what does not is vague. It completely depends on the author(s). In my view, what you did definitely deserves at least acknowledgment. Maybe they decided that because they did not use your data, then there is no reason to mention you. Maybe they did not really care about you and what you think, given that this was some time ago.


Communication difficulties with advisors - starting to impede work I could use some advice about my relationship with my doctoral advisors. Some context:

I'm about 1 year and 8 months into my PhD.
My program has relatively heavy course requirements. I have now finished most of my coursework, but much of my efforts until recently were focused on courses.
My field is relatively new, and very interdisciplinary. There are a lot of foundational challenges especially regarding synthesizing methodology from different contributing fields that haven't really been solved yet. My advisor is an expert in one of the fields, but not in the others.
Seven years ago, I was diagnosed with what is essentially schizophrenia and depression. It is still a struggle to manage symptoms, and that is not likely to change. My collegaues know about the issues in generalities, but I have not shared specifics due to bad previous experiences.

With respect to research, I have about 100 typed-out pages summarizing key related/foundational work, outlining my project methodology, system design and research questions. It's a lot of work, and I think it's very useful, but it's not results, and hence no publications. My advisors aren't happy with this.
Besides having no publications, they seem to think that I have focused too much on groundwork, and that my thesis's scope is too large. I know they are right about the scope -- in fact, we recently renegotiated the scope after my initial literature review revealed many unanswered questions that we would've had to address.
Since then, they really want me to (1) get some initial results, and (2) focus on one thing at a time. I am trying to do this, and expect to have initial results within a week. Still, in general, this is a problem for me:

I'm not used to working on one thing at a time. In my experience, working on a project usually involves working on 2-3 sub projects with the intention of integrating them at the next step, so that issues on one sub-task won't invalidate work on other sub-tasks.
I feel like we need a broader vision for where this is heading before we start potentially wasting time heading down one path.
Focusing on one thing is hard for me due to my mental heath issues. I don't always have control over what subject matter I'm able to process. I've found the best way to be productive is to switch between multiple tasks. The problem is related to focus, not to my understanding of the subject matter.

I haven't been able to discuss any of this with my advisors (and the last one in particular would require a discussion of my mental health, which I don't want to do). But leaving it unaddressed is also not working -- whenever I mention anything other than working on this one narrow task that we have all agreed that I should work on, it's shut down immediately under the heading of "you need to focus on this one thing." In fact, this recently led to a condescending and rude email from my advisor, which was really upsetting.
Another issue is an upcoming symposium. The head of my research group recently mentioned an online symposium on a topic that I think will be useful. Further, there is a good opportunity for me to present my "new research directions." I could easily put something together and attend the webinar, but I would have to talk to my advisor first. I have an (I think reasonable) anxiety that if I try to broach this subject, it will immediately be shot down and it will make him even more frustrated.
How should I approach this? Any advice is appreciated.

I think the core issue you are describing is relevant for many PhD students. Your mental health may excabate the effects, but does not seem central to the situation to me.
A PhD is a journey through uncharted territory, and that can feel uncomfortable. So in particular for industrious students, there always is a temptation to to not go where the dragons are yet, but to prepare just a little bit better - maybe read another paper for the literature review, revise the project proposal again, those things. But even within a single field, it will almost always be impossible to read all potentially relevant literature. At some point, a PhD student just has to take the leap.
For me in math/TCS, its just my own time which is on the line when doing research. Sure, maybe if I had read another paper I'd have seen that the theorem is already known, or found an incredibly useful ingredient to make the proof easier - but the time I spent trying to proof it still isn't wasted, as I learn from how I tried it. I'll concede that if you are eg doing experiments with animals or expensive chemicals, you do need to prepare well - but the point remains, at some point you need to do.
Polishing aside, you have 100 pages worth of research proposal + literature review. That is an enormous amount for what I am used to - 30 pages already seems pretty extensive to me. For a supervisor, getting a student to take this leap is something you can influence only in a limited way. So I can empathize with your supervisors frustration (although this doesnt excuse the mean remarks).
When it comes to the issue of preferring to have multiple active tasks, and to work on the best match to one's current mental state: I share that preference, and I think it is explainable very well without referring to any medical diagnosis. The moment to bring that up probably is once you have completed your designated task; and you should make clear that you understand that these tasks need to move you forward.


Can I use my blog posts for an academic publication? It is not very clear in the publication guidelines of journals or conferences whether one can post some preliminary data or results online (blog, twitter, facebook, etc.), gather feedback, and then edit and publish such results in a journal or conference publication (but in other fields it has happened with some embarassement).

Can a researcher post a blog-entry, or use twitter, sharing data and results with a journal or conference paper? Would it be considered self-plagiarism?

You'd need to ask the specific journal if they're okay with it.  I suspect many would be, since many other forms of quasi-publication prior to a paper are acceptable.


For astrophysics grad school, is an undergraduate major in "astrophysics" better than "physics with astrophysics focus"? I’m currently a high school junior who wants to major in a math field or physics, and possibly astrophysics. At the moment, I’m looking at Notre Dame as an option for college, but they don’t have an astrophysics major: the have a physics major that lets a student focus on a specific topic like astrophysics. That allows you to take astrophysics classes while pursuing a physics major but not actually majoring in astrophysics. I would like to attend grad school afterwards for astrophysics as well if I decide to go down that path. Would this not-completely-astrophysics major hurt me as I apply to grad school?

It's fine and probably even optimal.  for one thing, you don't know for sure that you will want astrophysics four years later.  And you are even open to math versus physics.

Do the general physics degree.  Gives you most flexibility. You can take a class or two in astro topics, but pick up general physics degree.  You don't even know if you won't like some other area when you learn it more (optics, solid state, etc etc.)  But in any case general physics program will serve you well for detailed astro study later. Make sure you get a solid grasp on mechanics your junior year, as celestial mechanics is an application of general mechanics

Since you already have some interest in a subfield of physics, I recommend not to major in math.  The nineteenth century math (hard calculus and diffyQ computations) is alive and well in physics departments but has been killed, buried, and pissed on, in modern math departments.  Also read why Dick Feynman left MIT math major.


How to make sense of a 2019 paper published in 2016 journal issue? I submitted a paper to a social sciences journal and it has been accepted. However, the publisher tells me it is going to be printed in the next weeks in the 2016 issue. How to make sense of this? Apparently the issue has been delayed a few years. However it will not mention the year 2019 and it is officially a 2016 paper issue. No digital copy since the journal doesn't have a webpage.  Can I still put 2019 in my CV? and if I want to present it in an upcoming conference?

It is an old journal in French that might had issues with their timeframe, collecting papers, printing, and moreover getting the editing work done on ambitious projects. Is it really an issue when the work was done? If this is part of PhD research, want difference does it make if it is possible to indicate in bibliography that the work was submitted and printed in 2019?

I would pull the paper. I would be worried that the issue is never going to be published and that the paper is going to sit in limbo for years. The fact that the journal has no web page, even in the social sciences, is concerning to me. Are you sure that libraries are going to get this newest issue when it comes out for it to be archived?

If I were to keep the paper in the pipeline for the journal, I would want some reassurances. I would look at the journal editorial board and review process. If the review process was exceptionally speedy and the initial decision was accept as is (or very minor revisions), I would worry the journal is desperate. A high rate of turn over in editors or reviewers (i.e., different people on every iteration) would also concern me. I would put a time contingency on the copyright transfer so that it expires if the issue is not published in the next few weeks.

Then you have all the issues with playing with the timeline. How are people (e.g., tenure committees or search committees) going to know when you did the work. Even saying that it was published in 2019, isn't the issue, committees want to know when you did the work. I can only imagine the headaches that it could cause with funders when trying to explain why work funded in 2018 is in a 2016 issue, regardless of when it came out. Screwing with the timeline is also probably going to mess up a lot of bibliometrics (e.g., 5 year impact factor would only go for citations through 2021 or really a 2 year window).


after-study work under an OPT In the US, an F1 STEM student can have an OPT after graduation and work without a work visa for up to 3 years. But the work has to be related to the major of F1. How to determine if the work is counted as being related to the F1 major?

Many cases are quite clear cut - someone graduating with a physics PhD getting a physics postdoc is obviously fine, for example. Generally, I think the answer is to be reasonable. If you (who's the person most familiar with the details about both your degree and job) struggle to come up with a reasonable explanation as to how the job is related to the degree, using skills developed during the degree, and at the right level, well, it probably wouldn't count. Note that you need to provide that motivation when listing the employer in the SEVP portal. If you're uncertain, or if this is a less clear cut case, do discuss it with the International Office at your university. They'll have a good idea about where the line tends to be drawn.

It's also useful to have a letter from your employer or academic advisor outlining how your job duties relate to the degree. Unlike the brief motivation for the SEVP portal, this letter is for later - either future visa applications (e.g. for the STEM OPT extension) or for being readmitted to the US after travel abroad.

Finally, note that I used the postdoc example since we're on Academia. For nonacademic jobs, and further OPT questions, you might get better answers at Expatriates Stack Exchange.


Etiquette of introducing yourself to a professor I am writing my master thesis at a university in Germany. I am looking into universities and institutes where I could carry out a PhD. One of the possibilities I have been looking into is a group at an university from Switzerland.

This group’s head will be tomorrow at my university, acting as a second examiner at a thesis defense. I think this is a good opportunity to introduce myself personally and maybe ask about the outlook of doing a PhD at his group.

What is the ettiquete in such situations? I think it is not uncommon to find yourself in an academic event with someone you are interested to work under.

Your best chance is to get one of the other examiners who is local to your university to introduce you. It would be better if this could happen at a social function (dinner, drinks, party for the newly minted PhD, etc), i.e., somewhere you might get a few minutes to actually talk. It would be best if your local acquaintance would pave the way with an email and some chit-chit so that you have a clue whether ProfZ even has a position available.

If you can't get someone who know you both to make an introduction, then you'll just have to walk up and introduce yourself. It would be better to have figured out in advance whether there is a position available or not, but it's getting a bit late for that (try anyway). If you can, you still might send ProfZ an email today introducing yourself and asking if they have a few minutes to talk about possible PhD positions at UniY while they are visiting.


How to negotiate salary at a school with a two-stage negotiation process? I have a tenure track job offer from school S. This school appears to have a two-stage strategy to negotiate a low salary with candidates. Early in the process, HR discusses the salary range, [MIN, MAX].  At a later stage, when the first candidate is chosen, in the first step HR will negotiate with candidate, to a mutually-agreed compensation; that's proposal A. After A is reached, HR will say, this is now my proposal; department still has to approve my proposal! Then comes the department head, which reduces the compensation further, to proposal B, likely to be the MIN value! The department head states that this is the final offer and cannot be negotiated.

I am in an excellent position to get several offers from other institutions. But results will appear in March or afterwards (some applications are now just being reviewed). On the other hand, if I accept the offer from S, it's not ethical to withdraw and join other schools later on.

The strategy of S sent me a negative signal about the school administration. However, I much like the faculty there and the school and the program are great fits. I am giving it a second thought whether I wish to join S. I now have to decide:

D1. Insist on proposal A (despite the fact that the department claimed that offer B is not negotiable)

D2. Reject the offer, do not live with a low salary, and pursue other applications for good (including an rearlier delayed offer)

D3. Accept the offer B, and don't argue over a few k USD a year.

Using this experience as an illustrative example, I would like to ask some general questions. The questions might be of interest to all applicants seeking faculty positions, when they negotiate salary:

Q1. Is two-stage negotiation a well-known business strategy to lower compensation package?

Q2. Is it ethical for HR to agree to a proposal, and later claim that it was countered by higher authority?

Q3. To what extent HRs have autonomy in negotiations?

Q4. Statistically, how often "final offers" are bluff/final? Your answer could depend on who says "this is our final offer and non-negotiable," HR or upper-level authority.

You may consider several cases for HR:

HR1. HR declares his autonomy level "before hand." For instance, he or she may say "Before starting, I would like to brief you on our procedure ... ", or "I am in full charge."

HR2. HR does not make any statement regarding his/her decision making independence. It may do so after a first agreement.

HR3. Employer sets bounds (MINs and MAXs). By definition, HR should be able to make independent decisions withing those bounds. Otherwise, the HR, the candidate, and the negotiation process, are being dismissed and disrespected by institution (and what's the point of negotiation with HR).

While I do appreciate the concern related to the competitiveness of the academic market, I'm especially concerned at the idea of taking an offer to work at a place where unethical business practices are accepted as the norm and you are just supposed to take it or leave it. While I think you can be the only person to choose what's right for you and your family, if you are in the personal position to be able to say "no thanks", even if you might not get another offer - then I'd strongly suggest you not be manipulated into a sort of "just be happy you have a job" situation using strong-arm tactics. You can push back or walk away - or pretend to, as JeffE says - but I would not suggest you just roll over and take it if you don't have to.

Why is this a problem?

This Is Called Low-Balling

  First make what you want the other person to agree to easy to accept
  by making it quick, cheap, easy, etc.

  Maximize their buy-in, in particular by getting both verbal and public
  commitment to this.

  Make it clear that they are agreeing to this of their own free will.

  Then change the agreement to what you really want. The other person
  may complain, but, if the low-ball is done correctly they should agree
  to the change.

  The trick of a successful low-ball is in the balance of making the
  initial request attractive enough to gain agreement, whilst not making
  the second request so outrageous that the other person refuses. It
  nevertheless is surprising how great a difference there can be between
  these two requests.

The fact that HR specifically told you that you are in "full charge"? Yeah, that's part of the low-ball technique. They are all playing the same game, together. HR is the good cop, the helpful salesman who really wants to get a great deal.

  Guuguen and Pascual (2000) found it to be important that the person
  believes that they have made a free and non-coerced agreement to the
  first request. In particular adding 'but you are free to accept or to
  refuse' to the first request increased compliance.

First, they put out a feeler - asking for a range. That's ethical, honest. Then they get you to show interest, negotiate, spend some time - make a commitment. OK so far. Then you come to an agreed upon decision...that's where honest negotiations end.

The "gee, I'd really like to do that, but my [boss/sales manager/department head/dean/provost]"...that's normal for a used car dealership in Fargo. How about they offer you a clear coat upgrade to go with being tenure track - just 10% off your salary. It's a real steal, we don't normally do this, but you seem like a real smart guy. Please.

Let's Talk Payments

If they want to negotiate, by all means if you are willing and able to negotiate, have fun. Yes, you do need to be able to say no, and perhaps you need to get past embarrassment and contact that previous offer or stall so you can have the comfort to mentally know you can turn this offer down no matter what.

"Gee mister, I sure do like your school, but since I originally talked with HR  I've had to consider some very compelling other options [like telling you to shove it]. I feel bad about this - truly - but I think my original agreement with HR for X was lower than I should of been willing to accept. It seems like X+10% is really what I should have agreed to.

This is within the range we had originally discussed, and I feel bad about bringing this up now, but I wasn't aware of these other options at the time."

Maybe, you feel awful bad about this - but you suppose, if it would just be too terribly untoward to want more than HR originally OKed, the department being so great and the department head being clearly such a great guy, you'd be willing to accept something more like you originally agreed to with HR.

Or you can be angry and make it clear that you can't negotiate with such a thing on the table - the walk-away. But you have to be actually willing to walk away.

They seems to want to play games, and turn-about is fair play. But you have to be willing to turn down the offer and do something else, period, or it won't work out so well.

Still, I'd warn you that they are telling you now - far in advance of joining - that they are willing to negotiate all the way to playing unethical games with their offers and candidates, including wasting their time and reneging on phantom offers. If your facts are correct, this is not a accident - it's a design.

Personally, of all the jobs I've had I've only had one employer of any kind - academia, small business, or large enterprise - try to low-ball me like you describe here. And I didn't even try to negotiate that one - I just silently thanked them for letting me know they think it'd be OK to play games with my livelihood before I joined, and I got out of there with all haste, so I can't say how "winning" might work out.


If one got good feedback from a double-blind review, is it ever possible/ justifiable to find out who the reviewer was? I got some impressively lengthy, detailed and mostly positive feedback in a double-blind peer review for a paper. Is it ok (or even possible), or is it against best practices (and considered taboo), to try to find out who the reviewer was - just in case you can get more feedback and share ideas related to the topic at hand?

As @SE318 explains (+1), it is unethical to try and find out who a reviewer is.  However it is not unethical for a reviewer to identify themselves if the so choose (some journals specifically give this option in their review form).  I can't see much problem with sending the journal a polite request for the editor to pass on a message explaining what you had in mind so that if the reviewer was interested in collaborating they could contact you.


Presenting the idea of a PhD research project before publishing it I have an idea for my PhD research project but my supervisor wants me to have that idea/model published or endorsed before I can start working on and she suggested that idea/model to be presented in a conference and have comments about that.

I know about normal papers being presented at conference but what is idea/model presented in the form of paper. Can anyone help me in understanding the format.

I think this is a good idea. There are many conferences in which they invite exclusively the Ph.D. students in different domains to a co-located workshop. There the students present their work (so far) and get comments and feedback. Further, there is a chance of getting collaboration by senior researchers.

Have a look at this: https://www.eurosla2019.se/programme/doctoral-student-workshop/


Attribution when creating images from other sources I'm writing a paper where I've created several images using clipart from various sources. Some sources are Creative Commons, some just require attribution while others require a specific disclaimer (e.g. Microsoft and Android logo usage) with specific wording.

My first thought was to have a 'Credit' section:

  CREDIT

  Windows is a registered trademark of Microsoft Corporation in the
  United States and other counties[53]. The Android robot is reproduced
  or modified from work created and shared by Google and used according
  to the terms described in the Creative Commons 3.0 Attribution
  License[54]. Figure 1 Physical System Architecture incorporates
  derived works for an aerial vehicle[55], surface vehicle[56],
  submersible vehicle[57] and a communications server[58]. Figure 9
  Testing Configuration incorporates derived works for the drone[55] and
  clock[59]. This diagram also utilises the following third party
  images: server[60], node.js logo[61], laptop[62], server[60], penguin
  tux[63], Microsoft Windows™ logo[53] and Android™ logo[54].

In my references section I then have the correct references as per IEEE formatting style, for example:

  [60] mimooh, “Clipart - Server,” 12-Aug-2011. [Online]. Available:
  http://openclipart.org/detail/155101/server-by-saisyukusanagi.
  [Accessed: 13-Oct-2013].

So my question is two fold:

Is above approach is valid?
Do I meet creative commons requirements by the above (see Android reference)?

I've tried finding style guide information on composite images and how to deal with creative commons but not had much luck. I have also not been able to find any example papers that deal with this.

The images are as follows (I'll have to add credits below):

N. Halftermeyer, Parrot AR.Drone 2.0 flying. 2012.
U. S. N. photo by J. S. J. Ebalo, Camp Lemonier, Djibouti (Oct. 26, 2004) (RELEASED) Robot used by Navy Explosive Ordnance Disposal Mobile Unit (EODMU).
MKFI, Bofors Double Eagle Mk II remotely operated underwater vehicle used for naval mine clearing by Finnish Navy. Photographed in Turku Forum Marinum during the Finnish Navy 2011 anniversary.
C. Berscheidt, Built-to-Spec Raspberry Pi Case. 2012.

Windows is a registered trademark of Microsoft Corporation in the United States and other counties.
The Android robot is reproduced or modified from work created and shared by Google and used according to the terms described in the Creative Commons 3.0 Attribution License.

rihard, “Clock + Calendar,” link
mimooh, “Server,” link
“node.js.” link
metalmarious, “Laptop,” link
L. E., Simon Budig, Anja Gerwinski, Penguin Tux, the Linux Mascot. 2012.

I think it's somewhat unusual for academic papers to have a Credits (I would use the plural) or Picture credits, for two reasons:

Academics usually strive to produce their own content, rather than reuse.
Most people wouldn't follow the proper attribution/disclaimer rules.

I, however, think your way of doing things is very adequate. Your Creative Commons attribution seems correct: as you can see here and there, the CC attribution requirements are actually pretty flexible.

The one thing I might do differently is the use of references for each of the attributions. It seems a bit overkill (takes up more space) and somewhat blurs the purpose of the references list. I would simply put the attributions inline in the text:

  This diagram also utilises the following third party images: server (by mimooh, 12-Aug-2011, http://openclipart.org/detail/155101/server-by-saisyukusanagi), etc.

Also note that, at least for openclipart.org but also for other online resources, you can actually abbreviate the URL without loss of functionality: http://openclipart.org/detail/155101 instead of http://openclipart.org/detail/155101/server-by-saisyukusanagi.


How much programming experience is needed before contacting a college professor for research/internship? I'm currently a sophomore in high school looking to work with a college professor in the near future. I'm interested in the computer science field, and I was wondering how much programming I should have under my belt before contacting a professor for research/internship opportunities? I'm currently studying Java, but I know for a fact that it's not enough. I've gotten the fundamentals down (classes, methods, arrays, etc.) and I've just scratched the surface of GUI programming. At what level would you guys deem it appropriate to get into contact with a professor? Thanks for your help!

There isn't any general rule about the level of programming required to work as a research assistant in computer science. There are many different subfields in computer science, and in many of them, doing research does not involve any programming at all. At the other extreme, some research projects might only be suitable for students with highly specialized knowledge in a particular kind of programming.

Even the same professor might have multiple projects, some of which require prior programming experience and some of which don't.

I am a researcher in the field of computer networks, and I work with high school students in the summer. I don't require any prior programming experience. Some of my students have prior experience, and some don't, but none of them have experience in the specifics of my research area, anyway. In general, for students with no research experience, I am looking for general qualities - learns quickly, responsible, punctual, good at taking feedback, good at writing notes and documenting their work - rather than any specific kind of technical expertise.

(P.S. I do not hire high school research students who contact me by themselves - I work with students who apply through a high school summer research program organized by my university. I encourage you to look for opportunities like that.)


Obtaining Letter of Support from Colleagues External to University for P&T I am planning to apply for tenure and promotion to Associate Professor this Fall 2018.

In our institution, it is not required to obtain the external letter of support for the application towards tenure and promotion to Associate Professor level.

However, it is required for the promotion from Associate Professor to Full Professor. I was told that when an associate professor applies for the promotion to Full Professor, the candidate need to take an electronic copy of the whole P&T file, then colleagues external to the University will be contacted and provided the electronic P&T file towards obtaining  their letter of support.

However, I am thinking if it would be prudent to obtain external letter of support and attach it along with my tenure and promotion to associate professor application file.

I have already took PDF of the whole P&T file. I am wondering if it would
be OK to upload the P&T PDF file to Google drive and provide the link to the file in the Google drive to  the colleagues external to the University towards the letter of support.

Please advise.

You can request the letter but I would recommend that the request be directly sent by and returned to the chair of the department or the chair of the departmental P&T tenure committee. They can then decide if it should be attached to the P&T file.

As far as sharing it via Google Drive or equivalent services, I would suggest that you investigate if your institution has a designated file transfer service and use that instead. Your P&T file is probably not something you would want to have "leaked."


Accepting a postdoc position (in a different field) after industry After a PhD in Biomedical Engineering (focus on Imaging and Robotics) with a decent publication record and some prestigious fellowships, I took on an industry research position at a well-known company, where I've been for 1.5 yrs. Still, I've kept one foot in academia with the goal/hope of one day returning (for the usual reasons: opportunity to do longer-term research, publish, mentor, etc).

Specifically, I've been collaborating with a well-known PI from a different field (Neuroscience) who needed help with a "side-project" (applying machine learning and related techniques to complex neuroimaging data). The project has gone further than expected, and we are close to publishing a paper. I expressed interest in continuing this work and, to my surprise, he invited me to interview; it went well, and I've been offered a postdoc position. Furthermore, since he lacks computational expertise, he wants to set me up with a co-mentor who is renown in the machine learning field.

I'm looking for opinions on how risky it'd be to make this jump. My concerns are:

Field change. While I've taught myself a range of computational techniques through this project (and through my industry
job), my prior publications were not in this field.
Neuroscience is even newer for me. Even assuming a productive postdoc, I worry about my
competitiveness for future TT positions compared to people
who did their PhD's in these exact areas (what do I bring that they couldn't bring?). I'm also concerned
about my CV appearing disjointed.
The mentorship situation, since the PI himself is not a computational     expert. The people in the co-mentor's lab are experts, of course, but I do not know them as well (yet).

Reasons this could be great:

I get to do more long-term, basic research in an area
in which I've always been
interested.
The main PI and I have worked well together, and he is genuinely interested in mentoring me, helping me apply for postdoc/early-career funding, establish independence, etc.
If the co-mentorship situation works out as planned, I'll receive great training from both sides.
Hopefully by having a head start and being close to a paper
already, I'd hit the ground running.

My options are pretty straightforward: Say no and continue my current industry job; say no and start looking for strong postdoc labs closer to my area of expertise (or another industry research position that prioritizes publications and longer-term research); or jump on board and swim!

TLDR: I'm "stuck" between two good options - terrible situation, I know. Still, I've been on the fence, as it's hard giving up a permanent position in industry for a risky alternative. I'd like to know if my concerns are valid, and I'm curious what others would do in my shoes. Apologies for the overly long post, and thanks very much for the feedback!

As far as I know, there no specific field for postdoctoral researchers. A project may require experts in different fields, where machine learning, image processing are highly needed in interdisciplinary fields (e.g., medical image processing).

In my opinion, you should respond to these questions before accepting the offer:

Are you an expert in the domain of the position (regardless of the boss's field) and do you fulfil its requirements?
It is important to note that as a postdoc, you will be responsible for your work and you won't be supervised in terms of your knowledge.
Does this intersect with your PhD in terms of research domain?
Usually, researchers do not know their exact subdomain based on their PhDs (which is more likely to be in several subdomains). For example, working in Imaging and Robotics can be considered as "Image processing", "Machine learning", "Artificial intelligence", "Pattern recognition", etc. I would say, any position in one of these fields will be accepted for postdoc and thus will define more the research path in the next years.

If you take a look at the research interests of any senior researcher over time, you will find slight changes.

I am also doing my postdoc in your field, but it is totally different from what I have done during my PhD. However, I could find a common subdomain between the two experiences and I decided to continue in this direction for the next years.


Getting a recommendation letter when applying for a job before finishing graduate program I am midway through the third year of a five year graduate program. Grad school has been fine and I am not struggling academically but there is a full-time job offering in my city (in a field related to my program) that is very interesting to me. If I take this job, I will leave my graduate program. I am not considering leaving my program for any other jobs.

What is the best way to go about applying for this job? The application requires two references and I will have a challenging time finding references that are not professors in my program. I would prefer that these professors not know that I am considering leaving the program, as I would like to stay in school if I am not offered the job or if I decide that it is not for me after all.

Sorry, but your problem is overconstrained. If you need two references, and all your potential references are professors, well, obviously at least two of your professors will know about your application. You could ask them not to tell others, but that's about it. In case you don't get the job you'd have to rely on them being professional about it. I'd generally expect them to be, but you know your professors better than we do.

Basically, you'll have to decide what you want the most - the job or no one to know that you're interested in the job. Alternatively, see if one or two constraints can be relaxed, including the constraints you haven't mentioned explicitly. For example, would the company be interested in waiting to hire you after graduation? Can you graduate earlier than planned? The latter is done every now and then when people are leaving for postdocs, so it's not out of the question.


How do junior faculty in the U.S. normally address senior faculty in emails? In the United States, what is the common way junior faculty address senior faculty in the same department or different department?

Hi First or Last name
Hi Dr ___
Dear Dr __
Dear Doctor ___
Dear Prof. ___
Dear Professor ___
No greetings, start the topic directly.

In my experience in the United States, most professors invite even their graduate students to call them by their given (first) name.  Junior faculty would be no less invited to familiar address.  Whether you say "Hi, Name" or just dive into communication is often a matter of personal style and communication medium---for example, emailing from one's phone often has much terser communication, and this is generally understood and not taken amiss.

Just because you are addressing somebody by their given name, however, doesn't mean you are actually an intimate or a peer.  Many senior faculty in the United States will still expect deference by junior faculty; they will just expect it to be shown by the tone and actions of interaction, rather than merely the formality of address.


Listing "memberships" on academic CV I have seen people listing "memberships" on their CV. Do you have certain rules of thumb for what to list? I have some myself, which are basically memberships that have happened automatically, when I have been invited to give talks - like, come give a talk, and please join our "board of associates". I don't do any work in those roles, and listing them feels a bit like CV padding. I am in the beginning of my career (first post doc).

What is the normal practice?

The general rule is "if you don't want someone to ask you about it, don't put in on your CV." Including such memberships is still standard practice for many as they signify both your involvement and willingness to continue to participate in your field. So, don't think of these memberships as padding, think of them as opportunities to highlight your accomplishments - unless you really can't find a positive way to discuss these memberships, in which case they should not be included.


Should I tell my postdoc advisor I'm intending to leave? I've decided to quit academia and am actively looking for other employment. Colleagues of mine have kept their postdoc advisors close as they've looked for work, but they also had close relationships with their advisors (maybe their advisors even helped out).

My advisor is only really interested in whether I'm producing a paper, so I don't see any real reason to give more than the standard 2-week/month notice once I've found a position. That is, unless there's some academic standard practice.

What's "good practice" in terms of notification?

There's nothing standard here. Give as much notice as you can, to be nice, and as much notice as you are legally required to if that's applicable in your jurisdiction. Don't burn a bridge if you don't have to. Even though you are leaving academia, you current boss may have connections to industry that they might be willing to use to help you find a non-academic job, so it might be worth talking to them now rather than when you find something.