Are sleep stations on-campus effective in promoting productivity of students? Several universities in the United States have begun setting up areas (usually in the library) for students to rest, ideally for those doing all-nighters. Its purpose is to help its students cope with the lack of sleep.  Not much has been said about its effectivity.

The student government of our university has been discussing employing the same concept  on-campus. I would like to know if this is a good idea or if it is more likely to promote a culture of lethargy.

My first thought was, Do you mean a dorm room?

But, many students in the US commute to school, so are overtaxed with having to travel from their residence to campus and back on a regular basis. They also often have part or full time jobs with commutes on top of their studies and many are taking stimulant medications.

It would probably be better to promote affordable housing options on and near campuses and create actual localized academic communities rather than the fractured rush-hour-to-a-degree that we currently see many students engaging in.

What do you mean by a "culture of lethargy?"

Rest is when the body and mind build new connections. Sleep is necessary for humans to function, not just some wasted time where we could be "more productive."

It depends on what kind of campus you are on whether it is a good idea.


How is PGCHE by distance learning viewed relative to in-class? I've been told by some that online or distance learning PGCHE's (post grad certificate in higher education - basically a certificate in teaching), and distant learning in general, is seen as not serious and that any qualification done over distance learning is disregarded in Europe.

Can anyone from Europe (especially CH) comment on whether distance learning qualifications are 'looked down upon' there?

In the UK many universities require new members of academic staff to obtain a PGCHE. The universities that I am familiar with offer the PGCHE curriculum in house via the School of Education. Since it is presented to new staff as a hoop to jump through, I know of no one outside of university administrators and schools of education that think the PGCHE, in any form, seriously. Further, I have seen many job adverts where a PGCHE is a "desirable" qualification, but never one where it is "essential". During hiring, we briefly consider the presence/absence of a PGCHE, but never more than that.


Is a PhD needed after an MD or DO if one wants to pursue a research career? I have completed my MD. I am more interested in research than in clinical practice. I know there are post-doc positions available which accept post-MD candidates. Still I am thinking of doing a PhD in my specialty of interest. However I would like to know what are the benefits of pursuing a PhD after receiving an MD? Is it really necessary to obtain a Ph.D. degree for a research career?

Look at it this way; an MD says you are qualified to practice medicine, and a PhD says you are qualified to do research. In theory you could practice medicine without an MD (it'd be illegal in many countries but not having an MD does not mean you don't have medical knowledge), and likewise you could do research, especially part-time, without a PhD.

Leaving semantics aside, having that degree significantly increases your chances of pursuing a career in a particular field. If you intend on leaving the clinic and devoting your time and energy to research I'd say that a PhD would be expected, when you look for jobs. Whether or not you can bypass that expectation with other qualifications would be speculation.

As it turns out an MD & PhD combination is... uhmmm how to put it delicately..  "so money". :)

I say you put your hat in front of you, figure what you want to do, and go for it. Many doctors here (in Sweden) go for a double degree and it is definitely not something that's frowned upon. On the contrary, in many cases it is an additional merit for future promotions.


Why are some good math journals not indexed by Thomson Reuters? I observed some very good math journals are not indexed by Thomson Reuters. The basis of my evaluation is the composition of the editorial board, the university or press that house the journals and the authors that publish with them. My question is what is likely the reason for this non-indexing?

The selection process used by Thomson Reuters for choosing journals is described, in detail, on this page: http://wokinfo.com/essays/journal-selection-process/
The basic standards (see the link for more information) are:

TIMELINESS
Timeliness of publication is a basic criterion in the evaluation process. It is of primary and fundamental importance. A journal must be publishing according to its stated frequency to be considered for inclusion in Web of Science. The ability to publish on time implies a healthy backlog of manuscripts essential for ongoing viability. It is not acceptable for a journal to appear chronically late, weeks or months after its cover date. To measure timeliness we need to see three consecutive current issues, one after another, as soon as they are published.
INTERNATIONAL EDITORIAL CONVENTIONS
Thomson Reuters also determines if the journal follows international editorial conventions, which are intended to optimize retrievability of source articles. These conventions include informative journal titles, fully descriptive article titles and author abstracts, complete bibliographic information for all cited references, and full address information for every author.
FULL TEXT ENGLISH
English is the universal language of science. For this reason Thomson Reuters focuses on journals that publish full text in English, or at very least, bibliographic information in English. There are many journals covered in Web of Science that publish articles with bibliographic information in English and full text in another language. However, going forward, it is clear that the journals most important to the international research community will publish full text in English. This is especially true in the natural sciences. There are notable exceptions to this rule in the Arts & Humanities and in Social Sciences topics. This is discussed further below. Nonetheless, full text English is highly desirable, especially if the journal intends to serve an international community of researchers. In addition, all journals must have cited references in the Roman alphabet.
PEER REVIEW
Application of the peer-review process is another indication of journal standards and signifies overall quality of the research presented and the completeness of cited references.6 Inclusion of Funding Acknowledgements is also strongly recommended. Not only do they help create a greater context for the journal, these acknowledgements also function as a confirmation of the importance of the research presented.

Once again, for a more detailed description visit http://wokinfo.com/essays/journal-selection-process/
Edit:
In response to Benoit Klockner's comment, I thought I would also quote the 'Citation Analysis' that is used by Thomson Reuters.

CITATION ANALYSIS
The Thomson Reuters Journal Selection Process is unique in that Thomson Reuters editors have a wealth of citation data available to them. Because Web of Science is a true citation index, all cited references from every item in every journal covered in Web of Science are indexed whether or not the cited work is also covered as a source publication. Through these data it is possible to measure the citation impact of journals under evaluation.
The importance of interpreting and understanding these data correctly cannot be emphasized too strongly. Using quantitative citation data to measure impact is meaningful only in the context of journals in the same general discipline. For example, smaller fields like Agricultural Engineering do not generate as many articles or citations as larger fields like Biotechnology or Genetics. In some areas, particularly in the Arts & Humanities, it may take a relatively long time for an article to attract a meaningful number of citations. But in other areas, such as the life sciences, it is not unusual for citations to accrue rapidly and peak after two or three years.7 These facts must be taken into consideration if citation data are to be used correctly.
Citation analysis takes place on at least two levels. Thomson Reuters looks for citations to the journal itself, as expressed by impact factor and/ or total citations received. For new journals that do not yet have a citation history at the publication level, analysts examine the citation record of the contributing authors and editorial board members. This allows them to see if the journal is able to attract contributions from scholars whose prior work has been useful to the research community.
Likewise, established journals that are not covered are often re-evaluated. These journals can experience new growth in citation impact resulting from changes such as translation into English, change in editorial focus, change in publisher, publishing medium, etc.
As noted above, because Thomson Reuters captures all cited references from each of the over 12,000 journals covered, citation information is available on journals not covered as well as those that are covered.
Self-citation rates are also taken into consideration. The self-cited rate relates a journal's self-citations to the number of times it is cited by all journals, including itself. For example, journal X was cited 15,000 times by all journals, including the 2,000 times it cited itself. Its self-cited rate is 2/15 or 13%.
It is entirely normal for authors to reference the prior work that is most relevant to their current results, regardless of the source journal in which the work was published. However, there are journals in which the observed rate of self-citation is a dominant influence in the total level of citation. For these journals, self-citation has the potential to distort the true role of the title in the context of the literature of its subject.8
Among all journals listed in the 2010 JCR Science Edition, for example, 85% have self-citation rates of less than 15%. This shows that self-citation is quite normal for most journals. Significant deviation from this normal rate, however, prompts an examination by Thomson Reuters to determine if excessive self-citations are being used to artificially inflate the impact factor. If we determine that self-citations are being used improperly, the journal's impact factor will be suppressed for at least two years and the journal may be considered for deselection from Web of Science.


Is it possible to refer to a specific section of the supplemental material? I will soon submit a paper to PRL. In the main text, I refer in many places to the supplemental material, which is divided in 3 parts.
Let's say that at page 2 of the main I show a result, and I refer to the 1st section of the supplemental material, at page 3 to the 2nd, and at page 4 to the 3rd.

Should I write in this case something like: "See supplemental material part 1", "See supplemental material part 2", etc or just "See supplemental material" each time, and leaving the reader to figure out where to look?

It's generally best to avoid making readers figure out anything.  I'd write "See supplemental material, part 1" or "See Part 1 of the supplemental material".  I can't think of any reason not to, unless perhaps you are extremely close to a page limit.


How harmful is it to submit side-results that are not new? During my research I often have side results. By a "side result" I mean e.g.  a mathematical lemma, that I use to prove something in my game-theory paper, but that may be useful in other contexts.

Since mathematics is not my main area of research, nor the area of my advisors, I find it hard to tell whether these side-results are new. I can Google, but I since this is not my field, I don't know what keywords to use. I can do an extensive literature review, but this might take me months and it is too much time to spend for a side-result.

What if I just submit a side-result to a medium-class journal? The reviewers will probably know whether the results are new. Then:

If the results are new, they will be published and this may help other people.
If the results are not new, the paper will just be rejected. This is not a big deal for me since these are only side-results.

My only concern is that the editor and reviewers will be angry at me for having wasted their time on results that are not new. This may be harmful to my reputation.

So, my question is: how harmful is it to send side-results that are not new?

EDIT: Many thanks to all the repliers. The solution I actually used was slightly different: I asked a game-theory expert! I thought that, just like I thought of this mathematical lemma in the context of game theory, other researchers in game theory may have come across it as well. He did not provide a reference, but immediately provided a very short proof of my lemma. So, now I am quite sure it is not worth publishing.

Your impulse to try to find out whether your "mathematical side results" are new and/or publishable is a great one, but I think you need to go about it in a different way. If you are not a mathematician and working without the guidance / mentorship of an experienced mathematician, trying to get your results published in math journals will be somewhere between difficult and quixotic.

Have you tried making use of the site mathoverflow.net? Asking whether a result exists in the literature should be on-topic for that site providing the result is viewed to be a sufficiently contentful piece of mathematics.  (Yes, there is a certain amount of elitism / snootiness here, which most people seem to agree is necessary in order to keep a research level math Q&A site afloat).  Anyway, you can certainly try: what is great about MO (and in fact most SE sites) is that it is very likely that whatever happens will happen with almost magical quickness: with high probability, if within a few hours no one comes along to answer your question, then the answer is not "well known" by the mathematical community.

Here are some specific issues with the float-it-to-the-journals plan that you propose.  (It is not an exhaustive list: probably that is not necessary.)

  What if I just submit a side-result to a medium-class journal, e.g. American Mathematical Monthly?

The American Mathematical Monthly is not a "medium-class journal".  It occupies a specific niche, and within that (small) niche it is one of the top journals.  For instance, I have submitted four papers to the AMM.  Two of them were rejected.  One of these rejected papers was easy to publish in a more "mainstream" journal; the other was not.  The other two papers got accepted...eventually.  But I turned in a larger number of revisions on these two papers (I believe they were 3 and 7 pages long) than on most of my other papers.  Most of these revisions were made after the mathematics was agreed upon to be correct and of the sort they wanted to publish.

After my first four submissions, many years of close reading and half a dozen referee reports, I think I have a pretty good idea of what the AMM wants to publish (not necessarily the same good idea as everyone on the editorial board).  I now sometimes advise other people as to whether their manuscripts ought to be submitted there.  Even so I have just written an article that I had at first thought I wanted to submit to the AMM, but now I am leaning towards submitting elsewhere, and I am not sure.  It's complicated!

  If the results are new, they will be published and this may help other people.

No, just because the results are new does not mean they will be published by any reputable mathematical journal.  I have a few manuscripts that I tried to publish at several different places but did not succeed.  Eventually I stopped.  I agree that in theory they could be published somewhere, but in practice this can be a lot of trouble.

(I agree that the results may help other people!  Consider making them available in some other form, e.g. in a manuscript on your webpage and on the arxiv.  You can put things on the arxiv that you do not have plans to publish, so long as you are reasonable about it.)

  If the results are not new, the paper will just be rejected. This is not a big deal for me since these are only side-results.

Hard no.  Results get republished all the time.  The refereeing process for math journals is that the editors seek opinions from one or two people.  If those one or two people have not seen the results before -- maybe they made a reasonable attempt to search the literature, or maybe they didn't; both occur frequently --
then the paper will likely not be rejected for that reason.  There are some notorious examples in the mathematical community of papers that were published containing content this is not only "not new" but is well known material from undergraduate courses, or is actually at a lower level than that.  This is actually a pretty bad way to be sure that the results are not new.

  My only concern is that the editor and reviewers will be angry at me for having wasted their time on results that are not new. This may be harmful to my reputation.

I think that is a legitimate but rather minor concern.  The mathematical community is vast, and although we talk about people in some ways, gossiping about poor submissions (that never appeared) is very rare (in my experience, obviously).  If you are willing to "take no for an answer" and spread out your submissions among multiple journals, I don't think this will be very harmful to your reputation.  Yes, you might be wasting people's time and that is worth thinking about, although the less appropriate the paper is, the quicker and easier it should be for a qualified party to see that.  I think the main consideration here is wasting your own time.  Are you aware that if you submit a paper to a math journal you should expect to wait at least six months for a referee report, and that delays of a year or more are not uncommon?  That's way too long to wait to find out whether some lemmas should be put in your game theory paper or not, isn't it?

In summary: I urge you not to use the journal refereeing process the way you suggest, but more for your own good than for the sake of your reputation.  I hope you know that even if you don't have any mathematical connections, you could still make some.  Universities have multiple departments for a reason: have you tried to make contact with anyone in the math department of your university?  If your colleagues there do not have the specific expertise to help you, they are still your colleagues so some of them should be willing to take a little time to direct you to the people who do.  I encourage you to take advantage of this.


Contact reviewers/authors after the end of the review cycle for follow up I recently submitted a paper to a conference and was just blown away by the quality of the reviews (double-blind). Not only were they very detailed, but they were also very informative and insightful. They really helped me move the work forward. I wanted to thank the reviewers (which I got a chance to do in the rebuttal stage) but also to perhaps even contact them for a follow up on their comments. I thought that I could perhaps add them as co-authors or even offer collaborations.

I was wondering if people thought whether or not it would be appropriate for journal editors or program committees to allow reviewers to connect with the author following the end of the review cycle should it be requested by either side. What would the down-side of such a follow-up system be?

As has been stated in the comments to your question, contact between author and reviewer once the review process is complete is no issue. In a double-blind system this hinges on establishing the contact and in that case, as stated by Nate Eldridge, it will have to be a contact from the reviewer. In other cases where authors are known to the reviewers it depends on the willingness of reviewers to reveal their name.

The editors obviously sits on the information that could connect the two under any circumstance and you can of course always ask an editor to forward a request to an anonymous reviewer. As an editor myself, I am not sure I would be altogether happy with such a development since it would mean a lot of communication back and forth concerning matters with which I have nothing to do. I will add that many if not most editors do this on their spare time or time they take from their own research and are not salaried to do the work. This is why I would think twice about making the request and make sure the reason is very good and of such interest that an editor will see benefits to science to make the effort. As you probably realize, doing this once is no big deal but if it becomes routine it will occupy much time for an editor. I would then clearly opt for changing the review system to not be anonymous and try to convince the community that such changes has benefits worth considering. Another option is to keep the review process double blind but then provide all information to both parties once a decision (accept or reject) has been reached.


Is it unethical to apply to/attend a PhD program knowing you MIGHT end up leaving it under a particular circumstance? Hypothetically, suppose one applies to and is admitted to both a funded PhD program in Field A and a master's program in Field B at the same university, in different departments. Suppose there was a structure in place at the university for both programs to be undertaken concurrently (an implication of this is that I would not have to pay tuition for the normally unfunded master's program).

Is it unethical to attend both programs, knowing that depending on how the Field B master's goes, I may end up leaving the Field A PhD (after receiving my Field A master's) for the Field B PhD at the same university? Note that this is not my intention going in, but simply the one unlikely but possible situation in which I know that I would leave. I don't expect this is likely to happen - and if for whatever reason I don't want to or can't make the switch to the Field B PhD program at that university, I would see the Field A PhD through no matter what.

Furthermore, if it is unethical to attend both programs, is it also unethical to apply to both programs? It goes without saying that I would not misrepresent myself in my statements of purpose to either program (or to my letter writers).

It is not unethical to apply to both programs.

However, for most advanced degree programs, the possibility of doing multiple programs simultaneously is remote, unless the departments have already established a method for undertaking work between the disciplines. For instance, there may be an interdisciplinary program or a "joint degree" program. In such cases, though, you will find it very difficult to find a funded program that will pay for your studies to complete a degree in another department.


what to do for one who starts a faculty job before semester starts What will be expected to do on a newly hired faculty member to start before a semester starts? No course to teach. Of course one can do their own research.

1.But is there any departmental need for the new hire to do during summer for example?

2.Will the school be willing to have new hires start 2 months before a semester starts?

At least for the US, the university generally has a specific date on which they expect new faculty to begin their employment - typically sometime in August for schools that are on semesters.  It's usually at least a week or two before the start of classes, to give time for various kinds of orientation / training / onboarding.  This start date is usually mentioned in the job posting, or during the interview process.

In principle you could negotiate an earlier date, but there'd probably have to be a good reason - something specific that you would be doing for the university during that time, beyond your usual research or course preparation.  The university has set their budget assuming that you will be paid starting on the designated start date, and is unlikely to be willing to start paying you sooner unless they are really getting something in exchange.  Indeed, most full-time faculty in the US are on 9-month contracts and don't receive salary during the summer months unless they are performing special services or have grant funding.

If you'll be arriving in the city earlier than your start date, it's reasonable to ask if you can start using your office, get a library card, etc, before your employment officially begins.  Your department will probably be happy to do little things like this as a courtesy to you.  And, of course, you can start meeting your colleagues and learning about the job.  You just won't be getting paid yet.


What is US equivalence of "diplome du baccalaureat technologique (STL) spécialité chimie de laboratoire et de procédés industriels"? If someone who has "diplome du baccalaureat technologique Sciences et technologies de laboratoire (STL) spécialité chimie de laboratoire et de procédés industriels" and wish to study further in the US, can he take admission as Freshman in a 4 year university? Or, can he take admission as sophomore directly? Or, is it equivalent to US Associate of Science degree, so he can take admission to a junior level?

To get admission to a US university, official transcripts are required which is supposed to be in an envelope sealed by the school and directly mailed from the school to the university. But since the French baccalaureat trancripts are in French, it needs a translation. So an official transcript can't be directly mailed as it is in French. In this case, what will be the official transcript? Should I take the original transcript to a translator/notary and send the translation along with the transcripts? But then it won't be in an envelope sealed by the school, will it be considered as official transcripts?

Thanks.

This diploma is a high school diploma with a focus on chemistry and industrial processes. As a "technological" baccalauréat it is designed for people who would like to continue with short-length studies (such as a trade school or something similar).

It is not a university diploma. Do not be confused by the name: it is not related to a "bachelor", which would be closer to what is called a "licence" in France. I don't believe a US university would let you skip the first year with just that diploma. French universities wouldn't, that's for sure. In fact, it's not even guaranteed that you could get easily admitted into a French university with this diploma: students with a "general" baccalauréat would have a clear advantage.


Cite in two different ways in same paper? Can I cite in two different ways in the same paper? Is this considered appropiate?

Example.

  It was first shown in Heston (1949) that the model is complete. An easier proof can be found in [5].

You should stick to one citation style in one document. But mentioning author names or publication dates in the text while using a numbered citation style is no problem:

  It was first shown by Heston in 1949 that the model is complete [4]. An easier proof can be found in [5].


What are the things one should consider while defending a PhD thesis, especially when the two examiners have completely different comments? I am a completing Ph.D student. I submitted my thesis 4 months ago and have recently received the comments from the examiners. But to my surprise, two examiners have provided entirely different comments. One of the reviewers has appraised my thesis and congratulated on my work while the other has given intense/critical and harsh comments saying that the thesis may need some more work to be of a standard quality. I learned that the second reviewer who has provided extended comments will be attending in person for my oral exam. Could you please give me tips on how to appear confident and prepare in the best way possible. Most of the comments seem genuine but there are comments where he is beyond the objectives of my study.
Your help would be highly appreciated.
Thank you.

You talk to your thesis advisor and do what s/he says. S/he'll be responsible for leading (or at least framing the) oral examination and working with the examiners to make sure that you get final approval.

None of us know you or your research or the needs of your university or department, the character and reputation of the examiners involved, and so forth -- you need a local expert.


How to thank a teacher in a thesis? Given that a student wants to thank you her teacher for her assistance to her project thesis, is it polite if she writes any of this at the end of her thesis:

Thanks to your assistance, my project was done under your supervision.
You have been my project's tutor. Now it is done successfully, thank you.

Well, what I wrote was partly humor, partly serious:

  "I would like to thank: Prof. [my adviser] for his advice and support
  throughout the thesis work, Prof. [] for his patience as I
  mis-implemented his design, [] for his assistance in selecting
  components, the [lab and department] for computer time, [], whose
  Masters thesis provided the format I have adopted, the manufacturers
  of [caffeinated beverages] for their stimulating ideas, E. Gary Gygax
  for giving me something to kill, and the States of Alaska and
  Confusion."

I think you're overthinking this. Any polite statement crediting those who have made a significant contribution to the project will be fine.

Suggestion: see if your school maintains copies of past theses in their library, read through a few to see what other people have done, and adopt what seems useful from those.


Why would a professor not reply? A professor has offered me a summer research project at his lab. The last we had talked was on a Zoom call during which I was offered the position. He had then asked me to send my academic records after which he would give the other documents like Offer Letter, Visa Forms, etc. I have mailed him my records and have asked to discuss the project dates. He is not responding to my emails. It's been almost 20 days. I have also sent follow-ups, the last one being sent this Monday. He still hasn't responded.
Has he cancelled my project? If so, why hasn't he informed? What should I do next? Should I send another follow up this Monday?

Given that the 20 or so days covers holiday periods there might be a simple answer. The professor might be traveling. Might even be sick, given the pandemic. You can follow up if you like, but keep it polite. If you have access to the department email address, you could ask them if there is a reason that they might not be replying.
Don't jump to conclusions, but follow up with other options that you have.


How difficult and common is it to switch labs after starting a PhD? I am having troubles deciding between pursuing a PhD in lab that is more bioinformatics flavored or a lab that is more computationally flavored.

What are the risks associated with switch labs after starting a PhD? How difficult? How common?

Currently I have an advisor willing to take me into his computationally flavored lab, but their primary sub-domain is not one to which I am familiar. I would like some assurances that switching labs would be an option 6-18 months into my PhD.
The alternative is to continue taking classes as a non-degree seeking student until I decide on what lab I like. I have no intention on switching universities.
Note, with either lab I can keep the same major. In other words, the difficulty of switching domains is not what I am asking here.
This is located in the USA.
I have read other questions such as:
Hiring a PhD student who left another PhD position
Switch PhD program: how to contact possible PhD advisors when already enrolled in PhD program?

The reason it is difficult to answer this is that it can depend to a large extent on personalities. A "new" advisor might not want to take you on thinking about their relationship with the "old" advisor. The "old" advisor might feel insulted and cause problems for you. You might, after a year, have responsibilities to the current lab that will be difficult to transfer. It can be a mess, but it happens.
Rather, I'd suggest that you make a commitment to a lab and stick to it. Your doctoral studies aren't your career and it is always possible to change direction after you finish a PhD, especially if it is within the same field. Changing labs can set you back, leaving you with a "lost" year as well as bad feelings.
But, for a bachelors degree holder starting doctoral studies immediately, the first order of business is passing comprehensives, which requires coursework for most. If you don't need to make a serious commitment to the research of a lab (as is true for most) then switching is generally easy and non-disruptive.
The research leading to the dissertation is to teach you how to do it within your field and how to write scholarly papers. Once you get that, the specifics of how you spend your career are pretty malleable.
That said, don't choose something you hate or you will lose motivation. If you start in something and have an opportunity to move before you finish and it isn't too disruptive, then you have an opportunity. But no answer here will guarantee that such an opportunity will arise. A straight path may be the quick path.


Doing a PhD in physics after doing bachelors and masters in mathematics I have done my bachelors and currently doing masters in pure mathematics. I have done four physics courses during bachelors degree which also includes special relativity. What is the possibility that I may prosper in theoretical physics and earn a PhD in any branch of mathematical physics?

Also, I am going to take the GRE this year but I am little bit confused about choosing subject in subject GRE since scoring in maths is much easier than scoring in physics (if later its possible to change departments then of course I'll choose maths). Any suggestion regarding that is also welcome.

First of all, please remember that PhD is not about learning; learning about many different areas/fields/subjects. More specifically, it is not about increasing you knowledge in breadth, i.e., you know Mathematics, you can now learn about physics, then you can learn about computer science and so on.

PhD is about training in research.

Ask your self this question:

How can I contribute to this area (may be theoretical physics or any) in this particular topic by utilizing the knowledge I already have (say, acquired during bachelors and masters) in this specific field (say, in pure mathematics)?

Once you get the answer to this question (it should be in the form of a nice research proposal) you will definitely be able to do your PhD in that area, which you would select and do homework for.

2nd part:

It really depends upon the institute and the department you are targeting to: what actually is the requirement there? And remember, some might not need GRE subject at all.

So, please make a list of the institutes/departments based upon your interests/priorities and mention their requirements. Then you would be in a better position to decide which one should you go for. Maybe, only because it is unavoidable or simply you can perform better in that.

I would suggest you to have a profound focus upon the first part. Chances are that you might end up targeting a Mathematics department only, still being able to contribute in physics. Even, otherwise would give you a clear vision of what should you do and what you don't.


Is it prudent for new faculty to abstain from voting in a job search if the rest of department faculty is highly divided? There is a job search in my department. The department is extremely divided on the candidates. As new faculty, should I abstain from voting? Is this a prudent choice?

It could be. It could also be a disastrous move. There is no way an outsider can judge just how messy your department is. Your best bet is to find someone in your department that you trust and ask them. I personally think jut abstaining for a hiring vote is a little weird. If you go down the abstain route, you may be best off abstaining from all votes.

The STFU strategy can work, but in really divided departments, at some point before tenure review you are going to have to take sides.


As a TA, how should I address the professor's difficult curriculum? This is my first semester being a TA for this course. However, the professor has changed since I took the course. The content seems to have grown in difficulty since I originally took the course, and I feel that the professor has been giving inadequate or unnecessarily difficult problems to get across relatively simple concepts in lectures, which I then have to explain in tutorials.

I have compared to my previous notes and although the major concepts are the same, the examples used are overly complex, and I can see some students are falling behind as a result. Is there an appropriate, professional way to get this message across to the professor without sounding like I am not familiar enough with the material for the position as an assistant for this course?

Begin with the assumption that there are good reasons for the change: professors rarely make a large change in a course without thinking about why (it's just too much work to bother).  Rather than beginning with your judgement (which might or might not be justified), open with an observation and a question, something like:

  I was looking at my old notes, and I've noticed that the examples have changed a lot and gotten significantly more complex.  I was wondering if you could tell me a little bit more about how you've changed the course and why?

Maybe the professor actually wants the class to be harder; maybe they just wanted it to be more current and don't realize it became harder as well; maybe you are overlooking something... all of these are possible, and until you understand how the professor is thinking about it, you don't have enough information to figure out how to proceed.


Respected journal uses only a single reviewer and has a high acceptance rate (>85%); could this be an acceptable practice? I have recently noticed a failed case of peer review at The Astrophysical Journal (ApJ). It is a solid journal in which researchers of astrophysics can present good science without worrying about the topic being fashionable (as opposed to, e.g., Nature and Science). The peer-reviewed paper in question was published in ApJ but retracted by the journal within a week after it was reported as a case of plagiarism.

However, the issue I'd like to raise is not about plagiarism but about the review process of the journal. In the aforementioned paper, there are obvious technical errors that do not even pass a basic sanity check. I believe that had it been properly reviewed, the paper could in no way have been accepted in the first place, plagiarized or not.

(For more information, see my comment on Jeffrey Beall's blog post about the incidence of plagiarism. Moreover, my Astronomy SE post contains some technical details. The latter was posed as a question but I'm now sure that my suspiscion---that there are blatant errors in the paper---is well-founded. I had at first shied away from the obvious conclusion just because I have no expertise in astrophysics.)

It is disturbing that the acceptance rate of the journal is very high (between 85--90%) while only a single referee participates in the review process. (ApJ seeks an additional opinion only if the acceptance decision cannot be made without one.) As the low quality of the retracted paper demonstrates, any such a single-reviewer model falls apart when a referee hastily signs off the paper.

This incident seems to show the poor review process of ApJ. Could this be justified simply on the grounds that no better practice is available in the field? Or is this worrysome even after acknowledging that academic customs greatly vary across different fields?

By saying

  This incidence demonstrates the poor review process of ApJ

you are already asserting an answer to your question.  What you can say based on the facts you have presented is that the peer review process failed in one instance.  The document you have linked indicates that the ApJ publishes roughly 4,000 papers per year, so one failure per year would represent just twenty-five thousandths of a percent.  Extrapolating based on that seems wrong (and in any case, you haven't mentioned any failures of the system in previous years).

The term acceptable refers to agreement of a group of people.  The refereeing process of the ApJ is clearly not only "acceptable", but in fact accepted, as it is a leading journal in its field.

More generally, should a high acceptance rate be a cause for concern?  Independent of other indicators, I think the answer is no.  A high acceptance rate for a leading journal may be surprising to researchers from other fields.  But it seems the ApJ is mainly interested in the correctness of a paper (rather than, as you say, whether it is fashionable).  So the acceptance rate should depend on the ratio of correct and incorrect papers submitted.  Here of course "incorrect" means fundamentally incorrect and unfixable.  I don't know of any fundamental reason that there must be a large fraction of incorrect papers.

Should the use of a single referee be a cause for concern?  For many (including myself) this is very surprising and goes counter to familiar practices.  But the ApJ is being up-front about this, so any group that wants to change the practice could start a new journal or lobby the editors of the ApJ.  I think this question is one the astrophysics community should handle for itself.  So far, their answer seems to be "no".


How to not fall in love with my co-author? I am a post-doc (male) and I am working on a research project with another post-doc (female) from the same university. During our work, I got to know her and started developing emotions towards her. Recently, I find myself thinking about her and missing her between our weekly meetings, instead of concentrating in my research. I do my best to avoid this development, in particular:

No physical contact, even not friendly handshakes.
No social events, even not eating lunch together. We only meet once a week to talk about our research.
No romantic talks, I never tell her that I like her or miss her or anything else that can be interpreted romantically.

But this does not help very much.

I worked with other women in the past but this is the first time I feel this way.

I am NOT interested in any romantic relationship now. I only want my focus back. How do I get it?

EDIT: After reading the answers, I did some research and found some relevant articles.

"She Wanted to Do Her Research. He Wanted to Talk 'Feelings.'" claims that women might be disturbed by expressions of romantic feelings by men colleagues, to the point that some of them decide to leave academia altogether. Of course, there is difference between senior-junior relations and two postdocs of the same level (as is my case), but this is still quite disturbing. And it makes me feel happy I did not reveal my emotions.
"Sexist Scientist: I Was Being 'Honest'" is about a man professor who was bashed and fired for saying "let me tell you about my trouble with girls... Three things happen when they are in the lab: You fall in love with them, they fall in love with you, and when you criticize them, they cry". This further illustrates the problem with talking about love in academia.

And, I think this might show that the question is on-topic in academia.

I'm afraid I can't answer your question about how to suppress romantic feelings you have for another person, for the trivial reason that humans have been grappling unsuccessfully with this question for thousands of years. The attempts to answer it have led to some wonderful works of fiction though, so I recommend that you do a "literature search" on the problem (pun intended) and maybe find some of the answers you seek.

What I can also add is that one of the most romantic love stories I'm aware of in science started off in a situation pretty similar to yours. It involved the meeting and eventual marriage of the mathematicians George Szekeres and Esther Klein. They were married for around 70 years and died of natural causes on the same day - see here, here and here for more details. So maybe falling in love with a coauthor is not something that one should categorically rule out. Of course, only you know your own circumstances and can decide whether this lesson is applicable to your situation.


explain bad grades to recommender I asked this professor for a recommendation letter. She told me to send her transcript, CV, statement of purpose and the thesis.
I have some bad grades (not in her class though) and don't know how to approach this:

option 1: in my email to her I will tell her the reason why I had those bad grades.
option 2: I just send her all the materials she asked of me without saying anything about the grades. In the statement of purpose, there were already 1-2 sentences explaining my performance in those classes, so if she reads it, she can understand the situation.
option 3: I send her the statement of purpose first. For the other materials, I will send them later. Then she will see   sop before the transcript
option 4:  I just send her all the materials she asked of me without saying anything about the grades. On the SOP, I don't mention my grade as well. Then, if she asks why my grade is bad, I will explain it to her.

Which one do you think is the best option, or do you recommend other alternatives?
Thank you all!

By asking for all of this information, it sounds like this professor is trying to write you a personalized letter, which is usually a good thing.  She's helping you out.
Therefore, it's completely reasonable to take option 1 and simply explain your bad grades to her.  I wouldn't go overboard here - she's not making a hiring/admitting decision regarding you.  But a few lines giving her some context for all the material she asked for is not at all amis.


Changing office hours by student request Usually, I poll my students at the beginning of the semester and voluntarily tweak my office hours if someone can't come to any of them (or offer office hours by appointment when appropriate). So I don't, in general, have a problem with doing this.

This semester, however, I am teaching two sections (100+ students each) of a very large centrally coordinated course. There are several other instructors and many graduate student TAs. All students are welcome in any and all office hours.

With that many students and so many office hours to choose from, I feel less accommodating with respect to modifying my hours. A large part of this hesitation is that I have extra responsibilities associated to the development of this course, so I'm already spending more time than usual on it. AND I'm applying for jobs.

I chose my current office hours for time management purposes. I've been asked by a few students if I could move one to a different day (a day that I usually work from home) or take appointments outside of my regularly scheduled office hour, and I really don't want to. In fact, I feel a little bit like it's inappropriate for them to make the request in a class this large and with so many resources already available.

Is it unreasonable for me to flat out refuse to change them?

If there are many different office hours on many different days and times, then it should be possible for nearly all of the students to find some time that is possible for them.  As such, moving office hours around is probably not necessary.

Likewise, it is entirely reasonable to defend your own time by not making appointments outside of other office hours.

There may, however, be a couple of students who have extraordinary circumstances that make it impossible for them to come to any of the available hours and which should be accommodated.  For example:

A non-traditional student may be juggling classes, work, and child-care responsibilities.
A "semi-professional" student athlete may have a punishing travel schedule.
Somebody with a major physical disability may have a schedule severely impacted by mobility and transport constraints.

As such, when a student makes a request for alternative office hours, I would recommend responding as follows:

Present the set of all office hours as alternatives.
If they can't make any of them, ask if there are extenuating circumstances affecting their schedule.
If you find their circumstances compelling, then make arrangements for you or one of the other instructors or TAs to meet them outside of normal office hours.

Accommodating one or two exceptional cases is a reasonable degree to stretch, but in the presence of many options, there is no reason to invite major impact on your own schedule merely for the sake of people's convenience and preference.  Poll to figure out which of the alternatives you'd be comfortable offering is best for the students, but don't go further than that except for the exceptional cases.


Ask authors for some data (after already asking one of the three authors without getting an answer) I have a question: I'm currently working on my PhD and I was looking for some specific data. After going through a lot of articels I found one from 2016 and one from 2017 both from the same three authors.

In this article the authors are trying to solve an empirical question and for this they create a very nice graph which shows exactly the data I was searching for. This graph is not the main subject of the article, only briefly mentioned and an interim solution to the main problem the authors are trying to solve.

Based on the article alone it is not possible to recreate the graph (because they are not using publicly available data).

Looking for a way to get the data I contacted one of the three authors via email (maybe this was a mistake). I wrote something like (my email was based on a question in this forum which I can't find right now):

I was reading your article
who I am and what I'm doing right now
what I'm interested in
what I need and that it would be very helpful if I could get the data (again I was pointing out that I only need the data points of the graph)

This was one week ago and I still got no answer. Should I contact the other two authors of the article?

I would wait longer for a response before following up or contacting the others. (Sticking with the "corresponding author" listed on the paper should be appropriate unless they are currently on leave from their position.) The authors may be busy and may not have gotten around to it.

The process of answering may also take some time. If you're the first one to request the data, they might even be talking among themselves about who has a clean copy, whether they want to release the data, whether they can release the raw data as well, how to verify you would adequately protect (raw) data, whether they have updated data to share, etc.

In the meantime, I'd suggest digging a bit more into the source of the data (did they do the experiments themselves? did they tediously collect it? did they buy access to the underlying data or get special permission?) so that you can see if you could replicate or approximate it. You could also see if any of the works citing them have used the same data (i.e. if there is evidence they have been willing to share it with others, that would suggest they are more likely to share with you).

You could also scour their academic websites and CVs.

Is further information available on their websites, like an unpublished appendix?
Is there a rendering of the graph online that somehow has the key data embedded in it?
Through their CVs, can you find potential points of contact? (E.g., if an author attended grad school with your advisor, or coauthored with another professor with whom you've taken a class, those profs might be especially good to ask advice of. If the prof you ask is on good terms with you and the author, they may even write an email on your behalf asking about the data.)


“Theories”/“frameworks” for how multiparadigmatic research should work (in the context of interdisciplinary research)? Interdisciplinary research is research generated from collaboration between people from different disciplines (or one person steeped in different disciplines).

This can mean simply that the multiple disciplines have knowledge of different domains of the world, and integrate their knowledge without any “paradigmatic tension” (where paradigm is meant in the philosophy of science sense, e.g. Kuhn’s sense). For example, a biologist and a chemist may cooperate on studying the biochemistry of a bacteria. The chemist has more knowledge of the low level chemical interaction, while the biologist has more knowledge of the higher level structure. The researchers combine knowledge of different aspects of the system, but are roughly within the same paradigm.

However, for some disciplines, especially in the social sciences, different disciplines don’t merely have knowledge of different aspects of the system, but have different perspectives/frameworks for analyzing the same aspects of the system. There is some “paradigmatic tension”. For example, economists often use rational choice models, and may even apply them in contexts that would traditionally be seen as in the domain of sociology (e.g. there is a famous model of ethnic segregation using a simple mathematical toy model and rational choice). On the other hand, sociologists also study segregation but tend to use an entirely different methodology and philosophy. I think both approaches can generate meaningful insight about the phenomenon. interdisciplinary research between these two would I guess look somewhat different than that between a chemist and a biologist. The researchers not only have different knowledge about different parts of the (social) system, but also have different perspectives/approaches to analyzing a given aspect of the system. The researchers study perhaps overlapping aspects of the same system, but are doing so in different paradigms, which may have some tension between them

I am wondering: Have things been written about how to deal with this latter type of “multiparadigmatic” research? Are there  frameworks/philosophies for how to get such different types of disciplines to fruitfully work together?

Interesting question. My suggestion would be to look in the social and historical sciences for advice how interdisciplinary research can work fruitfully. The standards of methodology and reproducibility can vary very strongly from fields like engieenring to psychology so that researchers from both fields have a very hard time to find a common denominator apart from common vocabulary or measured quantities.

In the social psychology/historical sciences branch I'm aware of very fruitful interdisciplinary projects/collaborations and results that have been published.

Even phycisists study social systems, nonlinearity of complex systems, population growth models etc. So often interdisciplinary research seems to be worthwile to understand which and how distinct quantities in complex systems are scaling. Multivariate statistics is a common method here to understand the structure of complex systems by different perspectives and methods. But a common scientific language or method seems necessary, even if it is as simple as counting things in both disciplines and relate quantities to distinct phenomena. While machine learning algorithms are not very smart, they can show at least whre possible correlations or dependencies from perspectives of each discipline are.

There have been many tests by researchers to publish nonsense articles in journals of other disciplines, e.g. Sokal affair. So rather falsifications of multiparadigmatic/interdisciplinary research.

I think a good place to look would be EU funding calls requiring interdisciplinary collaborators and setting up clear requirements and goals for the project results to get a picture what modern interdiscplinary research standards are.


I found a trove of Computer Science Masters thesis unprotected on a respected uni's website I was looking for some technical documentation in relation to development of a specific piece of software, using a Google search such as "ACMESoft" "ACME_Rhino" filetype:pdf.

I found a PDF hosted on a European University's website which looked to be of interest; detailing some generic processes in relation to my search query.

I haven't read much of the PDF though, since I then went to see what other resources were available, so I browsed to a URL such as https://fileserver.someuni.ac.at/files/cs/pdf/ instead of https://fileserver.someuni.ac.at/files/cs/pdf/0815.pdf - and a full Apache webserver directory listing was presented to me.

It occurred to me that these PDFs were all people's thesis. I clicked a couple to check, and some were lengthy documents - Masters etc.

I didn't go to university, so I don't know whether these documents are supposed to be public-domain or not; but it would appear to me they shouldn't be.

Is there anything I should do in this situation?

If you feel it's incorrect for them to share the links in public, you could contact the webmaster and question their process. They possibly should disable the file listing at the directory.

Nevertheless, it's possible that for some universities access to theses is provided free of charge for other researchers to access, and you probably found the location where all of them are stored.

I don't think access should be disabled to the files individually, but indeed it is my opinion that the file directory listing should be private. They probably have a website with descriptions somewhere else, that link to the files.


PhD application with mediocre grades, 2 SCI co-authored pubs., LORs from very well knows profs. in the area? I am going to start my master thesis now. During my master I performed not well, my GPA is about 2.9/4 which is really bad for me. I am not excusing but my mother had cancer and she died in september, even though I studied very hard I performed poorly in my exams. I would like to apply a PhD program when I graduate, however I scare like a little rat due to my low GPA. On the other hand, I have two co-authored publications in not excellent but very good journals. Moreover, I have been working two of my professors about 1 year and going to start my master thesis with them which would be really good I think. Furthermore, my university and department is well respected in the Europe.

Actually my main fear is that, in my transcript my low graded courses are in very tangent to my thesis and past projects that I made with those two profs. I believe that in the future, when the evaluator look at my application folder he would be very suprised about my transcript and qualifications, the discrepancy. When I said my grades during this semester to my advisors, they are shocked as I expected. I fear that, that discrepancy would form second thoughts in people's mind.

So my question is, as far as I cannot change my GPA anymore. What should I do more to contribute my application, and show to people actually I know the subject in contrast to my low grades?

This is not a duplicate question, I am asking what should I do. I am not asking the admission process, furthermore I am not in border imo.

I'm not sure whether your grades are that important. If they were good before and you are good in your thesis, everyone will understand that this was just due to external reasons.

Me personally, I'm more interested in the person and in the thesis then in the rest of the grades as long as they are not the core topic of the PhD work. But this might differ from person to person and institution to institution.


Can I Submit a Professor's Recommendation Letter from my Personal E-mail? I'm currently applying to a Chem Eng PhD in the US.
One of my professors wrote me a recommendation letter, but requested me to submit it myself to the university's website using my personal e-mail, as he will be very busy with some year-end obligations.

Is it okay to do such a thing? I cannot find any information about if this is acceptable or not...

Of course, I wrote an explanation on the page right before the Recommendation Letter, explaining the situation and listing his contact information if they ever need to confirm its authenticity.

Thank you for your answers!

This seems like a bad idea and I would do it only as a last resort.  Even with the disclaimers, it could raise questions in the reader's mind as to whether you forged the letter.  I think it was not appropriate for the professor to ask you to submit it yourself.

If the letter writer isn't able to submit the letter himself, a common alternative is for some other university employee, such as an administrative assistant, to submit the letter.  I would suggest pushing for something like this.


arXiv article says that code has been made available with the article, but I cannot find it I'm reading an article on published a few years ago (https://arxiv.org/abs/1708.08130). It says in the article (p.4 at the bottom) that a Mathematica code was made available "as an auxiliary file associated with the preprint of the paper on arXiv" to reproduce the plots they show there, but I cannot seem to recover it on arXiv (there is no code available under the corresponding tab). Am I missing something? Is it common for this kind of code to be 'unshared' after a while? Is there still another way to find it besides directly contacting the author?
Thanks in advance!

The "Code" tab is a relatively new addition to arXiv I believe, and may not have been there yet when the preprint was submitted. However, you can click on "Other formats" under "Downloads" in the menu on the right, and download the source. The package contains a .nb file, which I suppose is the notebook you are looking for.


Can not having any research papers be a reason for rejection for an MS program? I am applying to an MS program in CS. I have not published any technical papers, mainly because I had little opportunity to do research and I did not want to write a paper just for the sake of it. Will I be rejected for this reason? Also, do I stand a less chance of admission than my friend who has written an average technical paper (dumb topic IMHO)?

There is no way to predict whether you will be accepted or rejected from any graduate program.  Graduate admission is a random process.  You have some influence on the expected outcome, but the variance is set differently by each department, and you only get one trial per department per year.

That said, as far as I know, there are no CS MS programs that restrict admission to applicants with prior publications.  There are PhD programs where most students in some research areas had published (or at least publishable) results as undergraduates—algorithms at Princeton, for example. But even in those programs, and in those research areas, publication is not an actual requirement for admission.


Can post-docs serve as reviewers for grant proposals? I am always hearing that being a grant reviewer is  a great experience in learning how to write proposals. I am a post-doc with an eye on an academic career so would like to do this. Does it happen? How do I sign up? I am in physics and in USA, if that matters.

Absolutely a postdoc can be a reviewer, if a program manager thinks that they would be a good reviewer to have.  It's more rare than having more established people, but there is no prohibition.  In order to increase your changes of being invited, you need to get to know program managers and let then know you are interested in serving for reviewing.


Affiliation and address when writing under a pseudonym Quite a few threads have already discussed the issue of publishing articles under a pseudonym, such as

Is pseudonymous publication ethical?

If I publish under a pseudonym, can I still take credit for my work?

among others.  My question is:  with journal submission being what it is today, what should one write under e.g. "Address" and "Affiliation" when writing under a pseudonym?  For most journals, one has to write something in that field.

The Encyclopedia of Types of Algebras 2010 was published in the Nankai Series in Pure, Applied Mathematics and Theoretical Physics under the name "G. W. Zinbiel", a fictitious mathematician – the name was formed by taking the name "Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz" and reversing the order of the letters in the last name (really it was Jean-Louis Loday). As you can see, the affiliation is the famous "Zinbiel Institute of Mathematics, France"... an inexistent math institute (I heard it was located in Loday's apartment in Strasbourg).

From this example (published in 2012, so it certainly reflects modern practices), my guess is that as long as the editors accept it, you can pretty much put anything you like in the "affiliation".


Updating CV with Grant Funding Awarded but not used/PI internally but not externally on grants and contracts I have a couple of questions about how to report the funding I earned or maintained while at my previous employer on my CV. I worked for a public university academic research center where we had several state government contracts. The center director was listed as PI on all of these contracts, even though I led every aspect of the projects (developing the scope of work, budget, managing the project and staff, etc.). The center director submits the contract (along with other contracts) to the state agencies and negotiates any final budget details. The total awarded over two years was about $900k. How should I report this funding on my CV?
The second issue is that I was PI on two grants (one for $245k and the other for $650k), one was awarded two days before I left the center and the other a month after I left. I wasn't allowed to transfer the funding to my new organization (a non-profit research organization), so the center has all of that funding and the two projects to manage. I oversaw every aspect of the idea development and grant application process and would've been PI had I stayed.  Can I report this funding on my CV? If so, how should I do it

Just list them as honestly as you can manage.
For the first, that you were named as project director for a grant awarded to XXX (either the individual or the institution or both).
For the second that you developed and submitted a grant that was awarded, but that you left before the work was executed. If the grant was awarded to you, specifically, say that. Or say what the grant lists as your role, had you stayed.
It doesn't take a lot of words to get it right.


Is it possible for someone with a PhD from a top-200 university to find a faculty position at a top-20 university? I have talked with a friend that was the best in class PhD student at a top-200 university in USA, but she couldn't find any position as assistant professor position or fellowship in a top-20 university.

Is it even possible to do this transition?
What is taken under consideration when one makes such application?

I'll assume you are talking about tenure-track positions, due to the reference to an assistant professorship.  If you are talking about postdocs, then it really depends on how your field works (e.g., how many such positions there are and how they are distributed among different types of universities).

It's certainly possible to get a job in a much higher-ranked department than the one you graduated from, but a little arithmetic shows that it's very unlikely, assuming departments in your field aren't growing dramatically.

Let's assume a steady state, in which departments are neither growing nor shrinking, and let's make the simplifying assumption that they are all the same size.  Of course these assumptions aren't quite right, but they can generally serve as a first approximation.

What does it take to get a job at a comparable department to the one you graduated from?  In a steady state, each professor will eventually be replaced by one new hire, but they will typically train multiple Ph.D. students.  This means that there's just enough room to hire each professor's best student ever, over their whole career.  Of course the hiring won't actually work out that way, since the top students are not uniformly distributed among professors (and there will also be competition from students who attended higher or lower-ranked schools).  However, this sets a lower bound: if you aren't at least as good as the career-best student of a typical professor from a top X department, then you can't realistically expect to get a job at a top X department yourself.

Going up in the rankings is even harder.  The number of people who are their advisor's career-best student at a top 200 department is ten times the total number of positions at top 20 departments.  This means that 90% of them will fail to get such a job, since there just aren't enough positions to accommodate them.  In practice, it's even worse than these numbers indicate (generally much worse), but the point is that simple arithmetic guarantees at least a 90% failure rate even for these highly successful students.

So you shouldn't be surprised that your friend failed to go up in the rankings by a factor of 10: that requires either exceptional luck or exceptional accomplishments.

  What is taken under consideration when one makes such application?

It's really no different from any other application, with no special requirements or considerations.  You need to make the case that you are a better choice than any other available candidate.  Applicants from low-ranked department often face some initial skepticism, but hardly anyone would be silly enough to obsess over rankings while disregarding visibly superior accomplishments.


about starting date of postdoc I have been accepted for postdoc position. According the detail of postdoc

  the successful candidate will begin in January 2019

What does it mean? Can I start my work at any time of January? Am I right?

I would presume that you have to inquire with the lab/director/hiring manager/program manager to fix the actual start date by mutual agreement. You can't normally just choose unilaterally, and they may have a fixed date in mind. In general, the hiring entity decides on the employee's start date.


What is the best way to go about doing research as an undergrad (pointed question inside)? I am a 19 year old sophomore at a well-regarded state university.  I currently have a double major in the arts/humanities and public policy, with a minor in linguistics.  I just took the intro to PoliSci course, and I think I've done pretty well in it (practically guaranteed a 4.0).

Anyways, onto the question.  So I emailed my professor (as it was an entirely online course), and sent this....

"Professor ----,

[insert some stuff about grades, course]

Lastly, are you aware of any research/volunteer opportunities in the PoliSci department at ---?  I am aware of the [insert name of local policy network], but was wondering if you knew about any other interesting things going on.  I'm really interested in public policy (my additional major is in it!), but the international relations section in the course also interested me.  I'm particularly interested in humanitarian/human rights work.  I haven't taken many PoliSci courses yet, but I would be interested in getting involved in the PoliSci Department in any capacity.

Thanks,

Corjine"

He responded a few days later with this:

"Hi Corjine,

[stuff about courses/grade]

In terms of research work, most professors are happy to work with students as both research assistants (i.e., you help a faculty member on their work) or as research advisors (i.e., you work on your own research project and a faculty member provides oversight). I'd recommend looking at our bios online and directly contacting anyone that who's work look interesting or related to what you're wanting to research on your own. If you need additional help, you can also ask me and I'll do my best to refer you to the most appropriate person (I can also send an email introduction to that faculty member to help grease the wheels)." [emphasis mine]

thanks,

Professor ---"

I haven't taken many PoliSci courses yet.  The meat of my courses for this upcoming year will be my arts/humanities and linguistics courses, as that is how my degree is designed.  The majority of my junior and senior level classes being PoliSci and upper level courses.  So for the next year or so, I'm not going to have much formal polisci experience.  I'll only be taking public policy analysis and a methods of analysis class (read: statistics for PoliSci students).

What I'm worried about is how I'll go about getting research experience without much of an academic background in it.  I've had a passion/enthusiasm for politics for a long time, and the intro class was a breeze for me (barring a few theoretical concepts).  I'm just afraid about how it will pan out if I take shots in the dark without having the proper background, so to speak.  I'd love to get a jumpstart on research/volunteering/engagement if possible, but would it be more valuable for me to wait until junior year?  And would that reduce my chance of a good recommendation from the professor?

I really am at a loss here.  I haven't had any formal research experience before, and I'm working my first, true job this summer.  I'm winging it the best I can, but I want to make sure I'm not totally shooting myself in the foot at the starting gate.  Any suggestions/advice would be helpful!

tl;dr Is enthusiasm/willing to learn a good substitute for formal academic experience, or should I just hang tight for a year and wait to do some research?

Also, if this isn't an appropriate question for SE (I'm still pretty new here), let me know and I'll post elsewhere.  Thanks!

There is no harm in asking.

To answer your tl;dr question, it depends.  "Research" is not a monolithic thing.  Some professors may be working on projects that would be accessible to someone without a strong background in the subject, or would be willing to work with you to bring you up to speed.  Other projects may need someone who already has a strong background in a particular area and can jump right in.

Clearly you would be looking for a project of the first kind, and the only way to know whether anyone has one to suggest is to ask.  If you hear of something promising, talk to the professor; try to get a sense of whether it seems like something that would be interesting and accessible to you.  Be honest with the professor about what background you do or don't have.  (Don't try to present yourself as knowing more than you do; if you end up working on a project that you aren't prepared for, the result will only be frustration for everyone.)

If you find something that seems to be a good fit for you, great; if not, try again next year, with more courses under your belt.


What is the advantage of becoming a full professor if you already have tenure as an associate professor? What is the advantage of becoming a full professor if you are already an associate professor with tenure? Why not just stay an associate professor for life? What is the key difference between an associate professor and a full professor?

Why continue to write papers if you already have tenure? Can't a tenured associate professor stop writing papers and still have a job?

Why continue to write papers if you already have tenure? Can't a tenured associate professor not write papers and still have a job?

The general answer is simple: most of the people who would quit doing research after tenure in fact quit before tenure.  The ones who make it to tenure generally care about research and intend to continue at it for a long time.

In more detail:

Reaching an associate professor position in a research university is a long journey.  At this stage you could stop writing papers and lead a comfortable life, if you were willing to live with the disapproval of your department chair (which is not an easy thing: there are many ways they can make your life unpleasant even if they can't fire you).  However, if that's all you wanted, you could have had it with much less effort along the way.  By the time you reach tenure, you have let many opportunities to change your career go by, and you have repeatedly passed through filters intended to measure your talent and ambition.  This selection process means tenured professors at research universities generally really want to do research.  Now, sometimes people change their minds or burn out, and a few might never have intended to maintain their research programs.  However, on the whole this is a group that has been selected for research enthusiasm and ambition, so it's no surprise that on average they maintain the desire to do research.


Comparison between benefits of publishing a paper at a conference and a journal My friends submit their papers at different conferences. They visit to another university or institute in India or abroad to present their work at a gathering of researchers which is formally called conference. To celebrate it they share snapshots in Facebook, discuss their experience of a foreign trip, grand dinners, gossiping with new friends, so on and so forth.

To continue a good piece of research work, one face a lot of hardness and difficulties. Hence, one may expect maximum benefit from it. My question is how beneficial submitting a paper at highly reputed journal rather than a highly reputed conference academically? Which one is better?

Please compare between the benefit of a journal and a conference publication from different perspective. Note that, I am at the very beginning of my research career in Mathematics.

This depends on your field. In computer science, publishing at the best conferences is worth more on your CV than publishing in journals. In most other fields, journal publications (even in mediocre journals as long as they are properly peer-reviewed) are worth much more on your CV than conference papers at even the best peer-reviewed conferences.

Assuming that you are not in computer science or a field that shares its unusual norms, a good journal paper will be:

A more meaningful line on your CV;
More likely to be widely cited (or cited at all);
More likely to be thoroughly peer-reviewed, which may help to improve the paper (peer-review at many conferences is cursory or non-existent);
More likely to be indexed by Web of Science and Scopus so that it can be easily found and so that your citations can be counted;
More likely to be assigned a permanent DOI and permanent "home" on the web and in library collections.

Publishing via conferences does have advantages, though:

The publication process is usually faster, which can be particularly
important in fast-moving fields;
Conference papers are (in many if not most fields) much easier to get accepted for publication than papers in good journals;
Conference papers can be a good way to get early feedback on - or publicity for - work in progress;
Some conferences are closely associated with scholarly societies and their journals, and conference papers are sometimes considered
drafts of potential journal papers (authors of the best conference
papers may be invited to submit extended versions to a journal, for
instance);
Some treat conference papers (or at least, conference seminars) as a way to get publicity for already-published journal papers;
Attending conferences is a great way to build connections within your field, learn about the latest work of other groups, and meet
people who may be interested in your results or in working with you
in future. They can also be great fun.


Can I apply for PhD without recommendation from my masters advisor? I am currently applying for a PhD in a very competitive top tier university, which requires three references. I have two referees (my tutor and my undergraduate research project supervisor) who I am quite sure would write very good references for me.

I am stuck with the choice of my third referee:

I am currently doing a masters, but my masters supervisor is overly precise and temperamental. Although he is the "ideal" choice as my referee as he can comment on my research capabilities and working in a laboratory environment, I am certain that his reference will be lukewarm or may even be negative as I am currently having difficulty getting along with him. (ADDITION: I had only worked with this supervisor for 2-3 months. I also had an undergraduate research project supervisor who can also comment on my research abilities).

Alternatively, I have asked one of my lecturers (who I get along with very well) in my undergraduate, and he is very happy and eager to write a reference for me. I am quite sure that he will write a positive reference in support of my application. But he is unable to comment on my research abilities (just my academic capability and personality). Additionally, wouldn't the admissions tutors suspect that something is going on if all my referees are undergraduate even when I am taking a master's course??

What should I do?

PS. The problem is that he initially offered me a PhD position despite the fact that I wanted to pursue and applied for a masters programme. I turned it down as I was not interested in the PhD project and when I told him about my applications to other, top tier universities, his attitude towards me has changed and became very impatient, frustrated and uninterested. This is the reason why I am quite certain he will not be writing a positive reference for me.

Can I apply for PhD without recommendation from my masters advisor?

Yes, you can apply, but you may experience great difficulty in getting accepted.

  Additionally, wouldn't the admissions tutors suspect that something is going on if all my referees are undergraduate even when I am taking a master's course??

Most likely, yes.

  I am certain that his reference will be lukewarm or may even be negative as I am currently having difficulty getting along with him.

As others have suggested, the very important first step is to ask your advisor for a strong recommendation letter. If he agrees, no problem. If not, and there is nobody else that can comment in a strong, positive way about your research capabilities/potential, you may need to take a break from your studies and come up with a plan about how to move forward. I have been in such a situation.

I had a falling out with my MS advisor. I knew that he wouldn't write me a strong letter (I was not on speaking terms with him and I can't say much more than that). I also knew that I would need several strong recommendation letters commenting on my research capabilities/potential to continue on with my goal of pursuing a PhD. To get strong recommendations, I decided to go back into industry for a few years. In my field, a good percentage of industry jobs that I qualified for are heavily R&D focused. A good couple of years back in that environment landed me some solid opportunities to work on some cool stuff and impress some people who were very willing to help me out with pursuing my long-term goals.

I'd like to point out that this is still not a fail-safe approach: several schools I applied to explicitly asked me to submit a recommendation from my MS advisor. I explained to them my circumstance (it's actually a pretty good story), but that did not matter to them. I was very fortunate that one of my industry-based references was considered a big shot by several top schools I applied to, and for those schools that did not ask for a reference from my MS advisor, that worked out well for me. While there was a lot of hard work that went into my plan, I also feel in some ways that I got very lucky.

So, if you cannot get a strong recommendation from your MS advisor, be prepared to take some relatively drastic measures to improve your chances of success. Also, if it is possible in your field of study, leverage the skills you have obtained to build up some strong research references.


What am I doing to scare away prospective PhD students? During PhD admissions, our department assigns each admitted PhD student both a faculty and grad student contact, and we make every effort to express our excitement and enthusiasm about the student joining our program; often the faculty contact is a prospective advisor.  Usually there are some nice conversations, which provide a nice prelude to the on-campus visit.

In one or two cases, I've had a student simply stop responding to email.  In this instance, a student I admitted who was initially glad to talk to me quickly cut off contact with both me and the grad student contact (even before the visit).  I am trying to understand if this is a bad sign, or if I'm just reading too much into it.  It's been a long time since I was a PhD student, and I suppose there are a lot of reasons for this behavior.  Still, during my own PhD visits I was sure to be very polite and timely with everyone who contacted me.

Question for current prospective PhD students: Why would you give a faculty member the cold shoulder, rather than just replying politely and briefly to their email?

I can come up with lots of hypotheses (busy with classes, overwhelmed with contacts from faculty, or simply not interested in the program), but all I can do is guess.  I want to hear from the latest generation of students: what makes these interactions with prospective advisors tough?

I am not a prospective PhD student but a current one, and I am not in the mind of every PhD applicant, but my best guess is that some are not really interested in your department, some don't know how to say "I actually accepted an offer at a different school" with good manners, some are not fully sure if the e-mails come from a human or from an automated system (especially those who come from countries with a strong culture of professors ignoring or being mean to students, especially undergraduate - I wouldn't have imagined I'd receive personalized e-mails either!), and some are just rude. Or maybe it's just generational: in the same way it's starting to be considered more polite to never reply a text again than to politely decline a second date, and that many prospective employers say "we'll call you" after a job interview and they never ever call, there might be some perception among some people that it's better to be silent than to reply negatively? I don't know. Do they get interviewed before receiving an admission offer? Are they aware of how many offers you make out of a larger applicant pool? Emphasizing that might entice some of them to continue the conversation, or at least it might dissipate the question on whether they were not aware of things or, instead, they were plainly impolite.


Is it still considered research if my goal is not to publish? I began working on a fairly complex project with a few friends a few months back. It began as a hobby project, but became more serious as we realized how effective it may be. We collaborated with a professor a fair amount, and he registered us as 'undergraduate researchers' with the university. He is listed as our official mentor, but just gives advice when we have questions rather than steering the research.

We have no intention of publishing, and we are not even sure if our research is novel. We do incorporate very rigorous topics in our project, and I am wondering how I should describe this to Grad schools. "Undergraduate Research Project" seems misleading, but it seems like the most apt way to describe it. Thoughts?

Whether or not you publish, and whether or not it's novel, your effort certainly satisfies all reasonable definitions of 'research project'. You may use the term with impunity.


Is this footnote from one of Perelman's papers meant to be a joke, or is it mandatory to list one's source of funding? In one of Grigori Perelman's papers, on the first page there's a footnote where he says,

  ∗St.Petersburg branch of Steklov Mathematical Institute, Fontanka 27,
  St.Petersburg 191011, Russia. Email: perelman@pdmi.ras.ru or
  perelman@math.sunysb.edu ; I was partially supported by personal
  savings accumulated during my visits to the Courant Institute in the
  Fall of 1992, to the SUNY at Stony Brook in the Spring of 1993, and to
  the UC at Berkeley as a Miller Fellow in 1993-95. I’d like to thank
  everyone who worked to make those opportunities available to me.

Is this footnote from his famous paper meant to be a joke, or is it actually necessary to list one's source of funding, even if it is just one's personal savings?

Indeed, funding agencies require authors to acknowledge their funding, but it's not mandatory to acknowledge personal resources.

To me, however, that footnote doesn't sound like a joke at all, but a sincere acknowledgement of those who have supported him during previous years allowing him to have savings (and during those visits he might have worked on different topics).

That said, there are certainly a lot of joking acknowledgments around.


What to say to one PhD offer when still waiting to hear the result of a different and preferred PhD application? I have had two PhD interviews. One of the position (position A) I like more than the other (position B).

Now, I have gotton a reply from position B saying that they will offer me the PhD. However, before replying yes/no, I would like to know what the response is from position A.

Will it be good practice to let position B know that I will answer them once I know what the status is of my other application? Or is this sharing too much information?

The usual thing to do in this situation is to ask B when they need your response.  If that isn't enough time to hear back from A, then it's fine to ask B if you can have more time to decide (you don't need to say why).  Of course, they might say that they cannot give you more time, in which case you'll have to make a decision on B without knowing about A.

There's nothing wrong with wanting to consider all your options, and the people from B will undoubtedly read between the lines and understand that this is the situation, but you don't need to rub their nose in the fact that you'd rather be somewhere else.

To echo Pavel's answer, whatever decision you do give to B, you should stick with.  If B gives you a short deadline, and you decide to accept their offer before hearing from A, you're committed, and you need to immediately contact A and withdraw your application.   It's not appropriate to accept B while planning to back out if A later says yes.  Doing that would burn your bridges with people at B (and anyone who they talk to), and it could even be cause for A to rescind your acceptance, leaving you with nothing.


What is H18 (Canada)? I'm currently doing university level continuing education in Quebec, Canada.  As part of my degree, I want to do some courses from another university online.  I've talked to my chairperson, and he validated certain courses.  So I made an application this January, and recently received a conditional offer of admission.

One of the conditions was receiving the official transcript from my current university.  No problem, right?  Simply ask my home university to send them the document: they have an online form for it, which I filled out, and off it went.

What I'm concerned about is that under the Documents to send is listed "Official transcript" and under details, "with H18."  What is H18?  Does it refer to something that must be on the document, or something about the university?

H18 stands for Hiver 2018 (Winter 2018), that is, the current semester.

Similarly, E18 is Été 2018 (Summer 2018) and A18 is Automne 2018 (Fall 2018).

Source: I'm from Québec, and I recognize my former University software in this screen capture.


Will the admission committee actually read a student's paper mentioned in resume? (This question is set up under the EECS context, but any generic answer is much welcomed)
It is said that publications during one's undergraduate time will be an advantage in his/her PhD application. Usually, an undergraduate only starts publishing papers in his/her junior (3rd) year, and the application deadline usually comes at the end of his/her junior year. Hence, it is very likely that although the paper has been accepted by or even already presented in a certain conference, yet it has not been included into IEEE Xplore.
If the student has not uploaded the paper to some preprint database, such as arXiv or ResearchGate, then the admission committee will have no access to the paper. Of course, they may still be able to find some information about the paper, e.g., a tittle and an abstract appearing in the conference schedule, but after all they cannot go deeper into the paper content.
Questions

Does the admission committee even bother to go through the paper to assess the work quality? (Sometimes, you can have a rough quality assessment by looking at which journal/conference the paper is accepted by)
If the answer is positive, is it a good idea for the applicant to upload the papers to arXiv and provide the committee with the links so that the committee can read the papers as they wish?

While it's a single N experience from my graduate school application process:

  Does the admission committee even bother to go through the paper to
  assess the work quality? (Sometimes, you can have a rough quality
  assessment by looking at which journal/conference the paper is
  accepted by)

Yes. Several interviews I had mentioned content within the paper, at at least one of them had a good 10 or 15 minute discussion about the research that didn't start with the phrase "So, tell me what your paper was about..."

  If the answer is positive, is it a good idea for the applicant to
  upload the papers to arXiv and provide the committee with the links so
  that the committee can read the papers as they wish?

Yes. If your field is arXiv friendly, put it there. If your field isn't particularly arXiv friendly (like mine) and your paper is in press, consider providing the PDF as a supplement to your admissions packet.


What steps could universities take to reduce Ph.D. drop-outs? One of the major issues in universities with respect to PhD is the high dropout factor. Demotivated students cause a big loss to the university - a lot is spent on assistantships, but in the end, the students quit without making any meaningful contribution.

What steps do/should universities and faculty members take to reduce alarming drop-out rates? One step is obviously to choose the right women for the job, which we expect the admissions committee to do anyway. PhD involves years of wading through uncertainty and possibly it is in these years that students get distracted and unfocused. How should universities ensure the students remain unwavering in their efforts during these uncertain years?

One difficulty is that it's far from clear what the ideal dropout rate should be.  Probably not zero, for two reasons:

Even the best students sometimes find that their interests change over time, in ways nobody could have predicted.  Dropping out may become a quite sensible choice, in which case it's harmful for the university to discourage it.
It's reasonable for a university to give someone a chance even if it's not certain that they will succeed.  The only way to get a really low drop-out rate is to admit just the applicants that are obviously destined for success.  The top few schools can get away with this, but if everyone tried it, then many talented candidates would be shut out from graduate school.

So some attrition is OK, and some is bad but may be a necessary consequence of policies that are on the whole good.  The question then becomes how you distinguish these kinds from needless and damaging attrition, and then how you minimize that kind.

Advisors play a key role here, because some are much better than others at being supportive or motivational.  However, at least in mathematics, most advisors don't supervise very many students, so the numbers often aren't large enough to see patterns clearly.

I'm sure people have studied this problem, and perhaps identified best practices for addressing it.  However, in my experience any studies or solutions are not especially influential (at least in the few math departments I've been in).  Most discussions are at the stage of trying to figure out whether there is a real problem and if so why, rather than what to do about it.