working on an open problem for the master's thesis, without any guidance or help I am a master’s student studying mathematics (from Germany), currently writing my master’s thesis. In total, I have around six months to prepare, write and finish my thesis.

My advisor gave me an open problem to work on and he does not expect that I will solve it, but he expects that I am able to make new contributions on it, so that I have something new for my thesis. However, many established researchers in this research area are trying to attack this problem as well and for many years, but no one was able to proof even special cases or intermediate results until now. And my advisor doesn’t really know how to attack this problem as well, and this is one of the reasons why he does not guide me.

Already at the very beginning I told him that I’m pessimistic to be able to do this, but I just wanted to give it a try and I didn’t know that I have to work completely on my own. Now, I have tried it for two to three months, and all my attempts failed and my ideas didn’t work. Furthermore, my professional knowledge is still very limited, meanwhile I hit the wall and don’t know how to proceed.

I literally explained my advisor that I need his help and guidance to make some progress and I have told him all my attempts. The only reaction is always: He doesn’t know it either, and every time he just gives me another open problem (sometimes liked to the old one), without any idea how to attack these other problems. After trying the other suggestions, unsuccessfully, I decided to work on the first problem again (but still without any progress). I asked him again for help, and I literally explained him my situation that I'm stuck, and giving me another open problems is not that type of help which I need, what I need is guidance. But still no help..
Since I have to hand in a thesis this summer and there is no possibility to change the advisor, I really don't know what to do...

Do you have any idea or suggestion what I can do, or do you have similar experience? Or if it’s too opinion-based: what are possible ways to get out of such or similar situations?

First of all, your English is quite good, but as a fellow German I am well aware of the jokes about Germans excusing their poor English skills in high level prose. xD

Now back to topic:
I myself had to deal with an open problem during my master thesis, so here are some points I learned during that time that might help you:
(Disclaimer: As I wrote my thesis somewhere in between linear algebra and algorithmic number theory, some points might slightly differ depending on your field).

Mathematicians are only human. Yes, after sitting in lectures, with professors telling you all the brilliant results, it might seem as if a professor, someone who finished his studies in mathematics, might be some omnipotent entity that is always right. But that is not the case. That the problem you are working on hasn't been solved yet does not mean that it is impossible for you, it just means that the people trying it up to this point where not capable to do it. Maybe they hadn't enough time, maybe they hadn't gotten the right ideas, maybe it just wasn't tried by so many yet.
It seems to me that you are expecting your advisor to know the answers and just withhold them. But I'm rather sure he does not, he just doesn't know and wants to learn about it.
Even if you can't solve the problem, you can develop methods to help with it. For example you might implement efficient algorithms to compute many, many examples, which might then help you (if you have the time) or others to see a pattern and solve it. I don't know your topic, so I don't know if it would be best to use algorithms, plots,... to show results, but I'm sure you can come up with something.
You stated that your advisor does not expect you to completely solve the problem. That is in fact good. That means that even smaller contributions might be helpful. Can you get result for certain subclasses of the problem, can you solve some cases that are easier? Can you give relations and reformulations, e.g. "Problem A is equivalent to problem B, assuming condition C (thus I devote a whole chapter to the question when condition C holds)".
Find structural results related to your problem. For example say your problem is of the form "We have structures of type A and want to find the automorphisms between them" and you are not able to find these. Then it might still help to study the structures of type A, find other ways to see/write them, get any results on them that might then help someone else to find the automorphisms.
Prepare a time plan and discuss it with your advisor. For example you could say "I try to find results on problem A for another two weeks, if I don't find anything I will write down results on the structures (to at least have something to present) and after that look at these special cases: ... At (date) I will start writing down what I have up to this point, no matter how much it is."
If you have a well worked out plan, your advisor might be able to tell you what is important to him, which of the points should maybe get more attention or less.


The manuscript does not reach the required quality standard of this journal I just received the following comment from an Elsevier editor "The manuscript does not reach the required quality standard of this journal.". To my mind say just that or nothing is pretty much the same considering the minimum requirements for data openness and transparency.
there is already a good explanation of the submission process here:
what does the typical workflow of a journal look like
However, as an automated process, is prone to flaws as well as to improvements.
And does not explain in detail the received comment stated above.
Any thoughts on deciphering the comment stated above are greatly appreciated.
thank you
EDIT:
When I posted this question I forgot to add an essential and relevant fact to this conversion, which is: many and many scientific researchers don't have the opportunity to develop their research works in a team or even do it collaboratively. They have to rely on themselves to present their findings and defend their thesis. And everyone here is acquainted with the syndrome of  "tunnel effect" when writing. So having someone, that can give a small contribution to unlocking someone else research writing, I see as a welcoming behavior that can only benefit the scientific community at the individual level.

The answer you received indicates that your paper was a "desk rejection". The editor did not send out your paper for review as she/he believes that your paper has no chance of getting accepted.
Journals accept some papers and reject others. To save the time of reviewers, editors of a journal often have a look at a paper and gauge its chance of acceptance before sending it out for a review. A few aspects that they look for are:

Is the grammar/spelling sufficiently good? It does not have to be perfect for the submitted version, but reasonably good. Papers for which the grammar obstructs the understandability of the content should be fixed first before doing a proper review.
Is the contribution as stated in the paper substantial enough for paper acceptance in this journal even it the reviewers find that the paper is 100% correct and publishable? If the claimed contribution is not perceived to be on par with the other published papers in the journal, the paper won't make it in, and hence there is - again - no reason to send this out for review.
Does the paper overall appear to have substantial flaws? For instance, are non-trivial claims not accompanied by proofs, does the paper structure follow the conventions of the field, etc.?
Does the appearance of the paper match one of a paper from an established author? Do the figures look roughly professional, is there a change in font in the middle of the text, etc.?

If your paper falls short on one of these aspects (and a few others that I most likely have forgotten), you are likely to get a desk rejection. Note that it ultimately saves you time, as you get the answer earlier in this way. However, the editor could have been a bit more precise w.r.t. what exactly was wrong. The normal course of action in such a case is to ask your advisor for advice if you have one.


Studying PhD in the UK as an EU student? I have been very concerned about a friend who is considering studying PhD here in the UK. He wants to study music composition in RCM / Trinity Laban / guildhall music school.

I have been thinking about the financial issues he will be facing as an EU student (coming from EU).

I know that the government is offering up to £25000 doctoral loan, but that is definitely not enough to cover the living costs + fee, and also if he is applying for doctoral loan, he won't be able to apply for any scholarships / other funding.

I am desperate to look for an answer for him, I would love to know what are the options. And what type of funding is available? Any stipend or teaching/working for the university during his PhD?

(I honestly don't know much about PhD but I want to help him, and I have been digging through the web for every piece of info I could find.)

Firstly,

The government loan is a great tool, but you can still apply for school funding, you're right, this will mean he will not be able to get funding from a UK research council, but they still have other options.

Also to mention, the idea of school funding is that you can afford to live of it, most PhD's take-home £1200, which is more difficult in London.

The loan could be useful if he goes on to get a fees only scholarship or something, but yes, by itself its pretty useless.

If you try and get school funding, this usually means you agree to around 100 hours of unpaid teaching per year.

If they just get the loan, or Research Council funding, or any other funding not from the school, expect to earn around £15-£20 per hour for teaching. A bad thing about this is that you do not get paid any prep time, which is generally needed as an early stage PhD still coming to grips with the subject.

The website I found my funding from was jobs.ac.uk it gives lots of options and representative examples.

As a last resort, there is also bank style loans for PhD students.

Addition:

You will not be able to get a Postgraduate Doctoral Loan if:

you’ve received or will receive Research Council funding (for example, studentships, stipends, scholarships and tuition fee support)
you’re receiving a social work bursary
you’re eligible to apply for an NHS bursary (even if you’re not receiving it)
you’re already getting payments from student finance for another course that you’re studying
you’ve received a Postgraduate Doctoral Loan before - unless you left your course due to illness, bereavement or another serious personal reason
you already have a doctoral degree, or a qualification that’s equivalent or higher
you’re receiving a doctorate by publication
you’re behind in repayments for any previous loans from the Student Loans Company
Your course

So from what I read here, he will only not be allowed the loan if he gets research council funding, so he still could get school funding!


Asking my prof. whether he is affected by the hurricane in Texas, I and our security guards have not heard from nor seen a prof. of mine who I do research for.  We do know that he is from Texas, but we are unsure of his exact hometown.

How can I email to ask about his and his family's safety without overstepping any boundaries?

It's fine to ask. Like a commenter mentioned, probably better to not add that it's because you haven't heard from him on a particular issue (i.e. not "Did you forget those TPS reports, or are you affected by a hurricane?").

Some things to consider:

It's possible you haven't heard because he is directly affected: stranded, injured, hospitalized, dead.
However, it is also possible you haven't heard because his family is directly affected. He might be searching frantically for them, trying to make contact, helping in some way, etc.
Lastly, it's possible that the situation is completely unrelated.

With all of those things in mind, especially #2, a polite show of concern is certainly appropriate, without any attached expectations or requests. Something along the lines of "Since I know you have ties to Texas, I hope you and your family and friends are safe." Even if it turns out he isn't from the Houston/gulf coast area, there is a reasonable probability that he could know someone in the area and would appreciate the sentiment.


Which email address should a student use in a publication? So my student and I are writing a paper, my question is:  Among firstname.lastname@student.institution.domain vs firstname.lastname1@gmail.com

which sounds more professional?

I personally submitted a paper back when I was a bachelor student using my gmail address, although I had a similar student account like the one above. But my supervisor back then advised me not to use an @student account

In this related question, a reviewer mentioned that he tends to have a negative a-priori when he sees an author of a paper with a gmail address (he admits that it should mainly be about the quality of the work, but he can't help it)

It depends on many things, which I tried to order by descending priority:

Possible journal policy: in most cases, they don't have one
Possible employer policy: my own institution forbids the use of gmail.com addresses in lieu of our professional ones, because of a national policy forbidding use of commercial email providers for state-paid positions (prohibitions which my institution extends to students)
Which email address you'll keep longer: students email is temporary, but gmail.com may also be (it may not be hard to imagine that, in some near future, you become infuriated by Google's (or any company's) behavior and close your account). On that note: if you graduated from some institution, you may get a permanent alumni email redirection, which may last longer than all those individual accounts.
Which email looks more professional: smurf19@gmail.com sure doesn't do any good for your reputation.


If research design, data analysis, and results only are good, where is the line between suggesting major revision and rejection? Disclaimer: I am quite fresh as a researcher, even more as a reviewer.

I am reviewing a paper that appears to report a well-conducted empirical study, with proper data analysis. The results of the article are interesting and relevant for the journal.

However, I am very concerned with how the paper was written. I will provide some of my concerns of the report here:

Besides many grammatical errors - which I forgive as English is not my main language as well - the article is badly structured and often confusing. It fails to clearly state the research questions. No all the hypotheses are well supported by the literature review. It omits several key studies in the literature review. It often makes strong claims without a proper reference. It often fails to quantify stuff, falling to the tedious "a lot", "many", "few", "circa", etc. It is quite mysterious on certain aspects of the research design-e.g., a control group is suddenly mentioned without really clarifying what constituted the control group, and the paper reports that the experiment is not even a controlled experiment.

In sum, for the first sections I have nearly a comment for each of the manuscript paragraphs. I will do my best as a reviewer. I will provide all possible suggestions for improving the manuscript. Whereas I am confident that the results of the study are interesting, and that the research design is sound, I don't know if failing to clearly write the manuscript is a reason for suggesting rejection or for recommending major revisions.

Where is the line in this case? The journal does not clarify this in its reviewer guidelines.

In case of suggesting a major revision, what if the authors still fail to provide a clearly written and organized manuscript in a second round? Could I still request for major revisions?

I would recommend emailing the journal editor to ask for some of these clarifications. There might be certain unwritten policies endemic to that particular journal.
In general, you can ask for multiple rounds of revisions (major or minor) until you are satisfied. Peer review is supposed to be an iterative conversation. However, as I mentioned earlier, there could be certain journal policies regarding the number of revisions which you might get addressed if you talk to the editor.
As a reviewer, if you feel that the article should be rejected, you are free to make that claim. However, personally, I always give at least one chance to a paper (however horrible it is) to redress my comments.


What happens when a professor can't fund his/her own lab? Given that funding rates are notoriously low, often in the single digits, what happens when a professor is unable to fund his or her own students? Given that TA positions are also limited, they may not always be able to get their students to be funded as a TA.

I am guessing that most of the time a professor only ever takes on a student if they think there is a good chance they can obtain sufficient funding to see them through. However, I am guessing the edge case of running out of funds has happened before.

If there is no money, then there is no money. What happens quite often is that some of her or his colleagues help out by hiring deserving students instead till extra funding has been found. This has the advantage that it diminished the risk everybody faces because of uncertain funding, but it requires quite a bit of trust and good will in the department. So the worst case scenario, that the professor has no money and nobody wants to help her or him out, can definitely happen.

This also depends on the contract you have. In my case I got a 5 year contract to do my dissertation and some teaching. In that case, my position was safe: if somehow the professor's funding somehow failed the university had to come up with the difference, since the contract was not between the professor's lab and me, but between the university and me. This is in line with @IanSudbery s comment that, however much professors think of "their" lab as her or his private kingdom, it is only part of the university and not a separate entitiy. The fact that the university is finally responsible for paying the wages meant that the university required my professor to have guarantees for the funding for those five years before agreeing on the contract.


Is deferred enrollment normal or acceptable to graduate programs? What are the acceptable reasons for it? I am an undergraduate student majoring in computer science. I am currently doing graduate (Master's) program application for top US universities.

However, just now I get a pretty nice research assistant internship which requires me to work for them for one year.

I think I might take a gap year between my undergraduate and graduate study for the internship. But if I am accepted by the university I want to go, can I ask for a defer enrollment? I know I can reapply the next year, but despite the new research experience, my professor might refuse to write me reference letter again , the things might change (more applicants, less slots) and I might not be accepted the next year(I am also wondering will turning down an admission affect my application for the same program the next year). So I am thinking if I can use the defer enrollment to "hold" the admission.

Is taking a research gap year an acceptable reason for defer enrollment? Or generally, what are the acceptable reasons to take a defer enrollment?

Many (but not all) graduate programs will let you defer enrollment for a semester or a year.  At the institutions I am familiar with, they did not particularly care about the reason for the deferral; in fact, some of them did not even ask, except in the most general terms, why the student wanted to delay entering the program.  People understand that students may have other obligations and things that they want to do, and taking on an internship would be a perfectly normal reason for a deferral.

To find you whether a particular program will let you defer acceptance for a year, you will have to contact the program.  However, assuming they allow deferrals, what you are proposing does not sound like it should be a problem.


Can university educators provide private tutoring to anyone seeking it? Let me elaborate: I’m aware that school teachers often do private tutoring for children on the side (although I believe it’s only ethical/fair if they tutor children from other grades, classes or different schools).

Are university professors (at any level) able to engage in a similar job? Could they offer private tutoring as a paid service to students from different classes or institutions, or even to children and adults in general who need tutoring? Would this breach any university policies or regulations?

Many university professors have side gigs doing consulting work for industry, writing, starting companies and doing many other things. At all universities I’m familiar with this is permitted and to some extent even encouraged. Usually there will be a policy in place specifying how much outside work is permitted. For example, here is a link to the relevant policy at the University of California system.

As for your specific question, tutoring students at other universities is not any different from any other kind of side work. As long as the professor is in compliance with their institutional conflict of commitment policy, this is totally fine. The only other case where it would be a problem is if they want to make money from tutoring students at their own institution.  This would create a fairly blatant conflict of interest and would likely be regarded as unethical. See for example this question.


How would you give your students a tournament as assessment? I am currently teaching calculus and I thought it would be a good idea to do some kind of limit (and later derivative/integral) calculation tournament. The thing is... The students only seem to give their best if the activity is an actual assessment so I was wondering how can I prepare a tournament as a fair assessment.

The main issue is that as an assessment I want every student to be able to get the maximum score (otherwise it wouldn’t be fair), however since it is a tournament only one student can get the first place...

So I was wondering how one can organize a tournament in a way that is fair for all students? There are some remarks to take in consideration:

There should be a prize/incentive for attaining a better place in the tournament compared to the other students.
Everybody should be able to get the maximum score.
There should be some kind of rule which determines whether a student is out the tournament or not.
Every student needs to participate.
The whole tournament shouldn’t take longer than two hours; I can’t spend too much class time on that.

So with those remarks in mind how would you guys organize a tournament? I'd like to compile some suggestions before planning it.

Eager et al. describe how they use flipped classrooms to teach a mathematical biology course. As part of their course, they use "competitions" to motivate students. They discuss some of your concerns in a method paper:

  One of the difficulties in teaching a class via the flipped classroom is how to properly assess and examine student learning [3]. Because the class is very modeling focused, and modeling is a time-consuming process, traditional exams are very difficult to administer in a course like MTH 265. The authors’ solution to this problem is to do away with traditional
  exams in favor of both individual quizzes and group mathematical modeling competitions.
  The individual quizzes involve the students choosing two small modeling questions from a
  group of three questions and solving them with help from their class notes, homeworks,
  past computer programs and video lectures. These quizzes are given over a 55-minute time
  period. The questions in these quizzes are structured in such a way so that, after the student
  chooses which two problems to work on, he or she can solve both questions in a combined
  40 minutes—meaning that some (but not all) of the modeling process is given to them. These
  exams provide the students with an incentive to learn the material on their own (which is
  nontrivial in a flipped course with a large group component), as well as the motivation
  to become proficient in using some of the elementary skills a mathematical or quantitative
  biologists would need to possess (e.g. diagram building, script writing/amending, elementary
  algebra and calculus, scientific writing).

  The mathematical modeling competitions stemmed from the successful 24-hour Wisconsin
  Mathematical Modeling Challenge at UW-L, as well as the success of similar activities in
  other mathematical biology courses [8]. These competitions complement the individual, inclass
  quizzes by providing students with more open-ended modeling problems and a longer
  timespan to produce their solutions. These modeling problems can ofen be introduced with
  only a few paragraphs of text—with few or no equations. The students, in groups, then
  have 24 hours to come up with an appropriate model for this system, as well as answer
  the biological question posed. The group of students with the best solution is rewarded
  with perfect homework scores until the next modeling competition. The class has either
  an individual quiz or a modeling competition at the end of every other week for a total of three individual quizzes and three modeling competitions during the semester worth roughly
  30 percent of each student’s final grade.

Full citation (in case link breaks):  Eric Alan Eager, James Peirce & Patrick Barlow (2014) Math Bio or Biomath? Flipping the mathematical biology classroom, Letters in Biomathematics, 1:2, 139-155, DOI:
10.1080/23737867.2014.11414476

As a disclosure, I have collaborated with Eager and gave guest lectures in his Bio Math course about my own research.


How to efficiently (and aesthetically) display an evolving publications list on your webpage? I'm building a personal website where I'd like to list my publications. Perhaps one of the most efficient ways to do that would be to use or build something that pulls data from an online bib file, and lists entries. I found BibBase, but it has only a few options for display styles, and seems difficult to use if you want something that's also visually pleasing. Short of actually building the html page on your own, what are some common methods that people find useful for this task? How about any websites that you think do this very well?

(this is close to a shopping question, so I see some danger of this being closed - however, I think the question comes up for enough people in academia that it warrants an answer here)

What I have found most efficient is to indeed generate the publication list from a hosted bibtex file. The solution that I went for is to have a repository at Github Sites where I can commit my bibtex file (and any other static resources I want in my web page, including pictures and preprints), and then I generate the actual publication list using JavaScript code I extracted from the bibtexify project.

The result looks like that, which I find visually quite pleasing:

A live version is available on my website. To get access to the code you can clone my public GitHub repo. Then the actual publication list can be rendered on any website using some JS/CSS code. This should work either in a stand-alone Web site, integrated into whatever your university uses for hosting (as long as JavaScript / CSS code is allowed), or a CMS such as Wordpress.

Advantages of this approach:

Easy to update (just update the bibtex file and commit it)
Responsive (also works nice on mobile etc.)
Very few assumptions on the hosting environment - it just needs to support JavaScript and CSS.

Disadvantages of this approach:

Setting everything up is a bit hacky as you need to plumb together some JS/CSS code (but once it works I found the solution to be quite stable)

If there is interest I can try to find some time to write more detailed instructions on how to set everything up.


How can an undergraduate TA ask to give a lecture if they have given one in the past? TL;DR: I have given a lecture once for this course in the past during an emergency, and would like to re-challenge myself once I get adequate prep time, as I feel it is an important experience. Is it a possibility for me to do it in a non-emergency situation? How would you feel if an undergraduate TA asked for your permission to give a lecture?

Some background: I am currently a undergraduate teaching assistant for a junior-level undergraduate research statistics course in the US. There is one other TA besides me who is a third year PhD student (referred to as GTA from here). Both TA's only teach the lab and help grade. We (normally) do not go to the lecture sections.

During the third week of school, there was a big conference that GTA was going to attend, so I was supposed to teach the lab alone. No problem. The Friday before, I have a meeting with GTA to cover the lab content. While there, he informed me that I was also supposed to cover the lecture that third week. Apparently, our professor was ill and would not be returning, and I was the only one available to cover the lecture. The GTA and all three of the faculty members with prior experience teaching the course were all going to this same conference and could not teach it. Apparently, an email was sent to GTA, HR, our advisors, and all the important people except me. In the chaos, our professor forgot to inform me that I was giving the lecture.

The first lecture was the following Monday morning, and I did not have enough time to prepare a PowerPoint with the lab prep also going on at the same time. The professor did not have any material pre-made for the course for me to reference (PPT, etc.), so needless to say, I completely botched that lecture. Fortunately, I was able to prepare a very good PPT for the Wednesday lecture and redeemed myself and managed to get through all the required material. However, the whole experience has left a sour taste in my mouth. I KNOW I can do better if I have more than three days to prepare, and I know that week's performance reflects poorly on me. This experience also made me realize how important it is to practice preparing for a lecture before I become a professor and it have a possibility to poorly reflect on my tenure package. I would really like to have a chance to give another lecture in the future for this course .

Now I know my giving a lecture was a very special case, as I have never heard of an undergraduate student giving a lecture. The professor is currently not back yet, and the graduate TA is teaching the lectures. I was informed that the responsibility should not fall on me again this semester, as there are three experienced faculty members that can cover the lecture before it comes to that.

While I probably will not do it until next semester given that the professor is not back yet, I am just wondering if this is something that would be appropriate for me to even try asking permission for. I am not sure how I should approach him on this topic. How would you feel if an undergraduate TA asked for your permission to give a lecture?

Just to add: The professor is not aware that he did not inform me that I was giving the lecture, so I don't want to bring up the fact that I want a second chance, since I don't plan to make him aware of our miscommunication. I don't want to guilt him into giving me another chance if it would make him uncomfortable.

Thank you for your time.

My first reaction, if a TA or GTA asked to give a lecture, would be to worry about the time.  Almost every undergrad math class is in a rush to cover the material.  At the end of almost every course, almost every math lecturer is wishing for another day or two.  And you want one of my precious, precious days?  Even if you do a really swell job, you might leave some loose ends, which I have to spend 5 or 10 minutes the next class polishing up. Then I have to cram that day's 50 minutes into 40 minutes.   I say this so you know what you might be asking.

The second thing is that, depending on your location and school, there may be rules about who can teach at what level.  In Texas, there are laws (from the state legislature) which say that a master's degree can teach math classes only up to a certain level.  And that a grad student can teach classes only up to a certain level.  And some schools advertise things like, "All classes are taught by professors."  So you might run into a rule or law that simply prevents you from lecturing in a non-emergency situation.

Having said that, I don't see any problem with you approaching the professor and saying that you would like more experience lecturing.  You understand there are hurdles, but if possible, you'd like to do another lecture.


How to start a collaborative online research project? I am interested in solving some mathematical combinatorial problems. Besides the Polymath project, are there some other online projects where I can state the problems, my approach towards a solution, and then to expect some people to help and collaborate in order to solve the problems and then together publish the solutions?

I think one of the best collaborative mathematical websites is here on Stack Exchange; take a look at Mathematics on Stack Exchange to see how many different mathematical questions are posted with various topics and many professionals and mathematicians also collaborate in this site so the user can easilly can learn many mathematical things, find many professional answers and become familiar with new mathematical topics as well. Even by just reading the questions and answers on that site, the user gets familiar with many mathematical topics. It is helpful indeed, at least for me. I strongly encourage you to take a look at that website and enjoy mathematics.


When and why a scientific technical report is written? While making some paper search in my scientific field, sometimes I find articles that are not published in journals or conference proceedings, but as technical reports.

In my experience, I've never written a technical report, and I've never even been asked to do it.

So I was wondering: what's the difference between a technical report and a scientific paper?
Why some researchers publish a work as technical report instead of sending it to a conference or a journal?

When do you suggest to write one instead of addressing it to a conference or a journal?

PS: It seems to me that writing technical reports is more diffused in English-speaking world than in Continental Europe. Is it true? Why?

The main advantages of a research report is that it's published very fast, and without reviewing process. From what I've seen, a research report is basically used:

to publish a longer version of a paper, for instance including proofs or detailed examples that couldn't fit in a version submitted to a conference.
to put a timestamp on an idea, in order to be able to claim "We did it back then"
to create a reference that can be cited for project reporting, even though the work has not been published (yet).
to make a pre-print document freely available, for instance if the published version is behind a paywall.

Such features are particularly useful when one wants to disseminate (for instance sharing with some colleagues) some unpublished material. Basically, I'd say that most of this can also be achieved by submitting the paper to a public repository, such as arXiv.

EDIT: considering the language question, intuitively, I would say that when research reports are used in the publication process, it's likely they are written in English. If a non-English speaking university does not offer a mechanism to submit research reports written in English, that might explain why it's not used. However, I've written research reports in France and Italy (in English).


Is there any non-commercial alternative to ResearcherID? Identifying uniquely a researcher as author of a publication is important. There is a commercial effort to create researcher ID for every researcher. It is not likely to succeed if it is not multiple publisher effort. Something like DOI and CrossRef.

Is there truly non-commercial alternative emerging?

ORCID is supposed to take care of that and it seems to gain significant traction. According to this presentation, it should be launched in fall this year (2012). However, I am not sure whether it falls under your definition of "non-commercial".

I am myself very curious about it, my hopes are that finally it will take care of disambiguation of names like "John Smith" - for me e.g., Web of Science database is practically unusable as it shows several thousands of papers for my name :-|.


Should I try to warn administration about truly unacceptable professor behavior? I was kicked out of my lab late in my graduate school career, which destroyed my confidence and obviously delayed my graduation by 2+ years. What's more, my advisor tried to convince me to drop out of graduate school, saying I was just "embarrassing myself", that I just didn't have any ability.

After me, there were many more awful events-- one person (non-student) was fired and rather slandered in an email to the lab; multiple postdocs had their projects pulled out from under them and were forced to start over in another lab, no papers; I know another graduate student there who has been struggling to decide whether to drop out; in all cases this advisor tries to destroy the person's confidence and convince them they are incapable of success.

I tried to talk to the administration a year or so after I got kicked out... just to suggest that such things should not happen without any scrutiny from the uni. I think it was just viewed as sour grapes, and nothing happened. Recently, my (second) PhD advisor suggested in a veiled way that I should try again, and maybe if I got all the other "survivors" together, we would have credibility.  I think it would probably be useless and risky for me.  But this person should not be in such a position of power over vulnerable junior scientists. Is it morally wrong for me to do nothing? But what could I do? (I think the best action would be for my advisor to organize something but like all advisors, mine 90% only cares about his/her own career).

Should I try to warn administration about truly unacceptable professor behavior?

While it's tempting and noble to want to help others who have to deal with your previous advisor, my suggestion would be:

Move on with your life,
Do the best research/teaching you can, and
Try to make a positive impact on those in your relatively local area (students, collaborators, etc.)

I have some familiarity in dealing with unacceptable supervisor behavior. My former PhD advisor threatened me with physical violence and kicked me out of the program. Another senior faculty member and most of the students in our research group witnessed the event, but none of them would admit to my face what happened. I effectively had nobody willing to provide an eyewitness account of the events (I suppose they were too worried about their own fate; one of the students who witnessed the event is now a tenured faculty member at a top 5 school in my field).

From the fallout of this situation, it was hard enough for me to move on with my goal of getting a PhD without having a recommendation letter from my previous advisor. Once I was able to get into another program, I set out to do the best work I could do and this drives what I do to this very day.

Sure, there are times I wished I would've brought this matter to the attention of administrative staff of my previous institution, but then I recall how difficult it was for me to get back to where I wanted to be, and I try to do the best I can in my little corner of the world using my abilities and not worrying about that "other guy." Plus, I'd like to think that if they screw up enough, someone "important enough" will witness it and take the appropriate actions.

I personally see way more downside in lodging an official complaint with the administrative personnel than moving on as I suggest, simply because you have no way of knowing the severity of how painful your former advisor can make your life and the impact this can have on your career.

Good luck.


What to do on a desk reject of a revised paper? Since this is a longer story, let me first give some background:

We submitted a publication to a journal in the field of engineering. The article remained on the status “with editor” for more than two months. Our inquiries with the editor-in-chief and through the publisher’s contact form were not answered. When we contacted the assistant editor, things got moving and we got a “major revision” with rather positive, but brief comments from two reviewers. The editor-in-chief handled the manuscript. We addressed all of the comments very carefully and resubmitted.

The next day we received a desk reject from the editor-in-chief as the handling editor. They said our article was out of scope and had a lack of novelty. Both of these issues have not been mentioned by the previous decision letter or the reviewers’ comments. On the contrary, one of the reviewers specifically commented that the paper was on scope in this journal and the results would be useful for researchers and practitioners.

The journal does not have a formal way to appeal, and the author guidelines state that editor decisions are final. The editor-in-chief did not react to our request to clarify how our manuscript could have become worse, i.e. out of scope, after the revision. Due to a number of constraints, it is difficult for us to go to another journal.

If we would have gotten a desk reject on the initial submission in a useful delay, I would have accepted the decision. But I find it unprofessional to reject a revised manuscript on those grounds.

Given these circumstances, how should we proceed?

Something out of the ordinary clearly happened. It's not professional to reject a paper as being out of scope after it's been revised. My speculative guess is that the editor-in-chief is not very active, and the assistant editor was trying to keep things moving on her own initiative. The letters you received might well be automated emails with automated signatures by the editor-in-chief, i.e. the EiC didn't actually handle your manuscript. However this is pure speculation, and can be completely wrong.

Suggestions on what to do now: if you received a personalized letter from the editor-in-chief saying your paper is out of scope, don't bother appealing the decision and submit it elsewhere. Otherwise, you can write back to the journal to check if there was a mistake, pointing out that one of the reviewers did, after all, say your paper was within scope + useful to the field. I would not be very hopeful, but it's an option.


How should I deal with incorrect information given to me by a TA I'm in an introductory CS class, and we have a small project we need to complete. I was struggling, so I went to the student(undergrad) TA's office hours, and asked a couple questions which made sense to me given my understanding of the material. He seemed preoccupied with work on his computer, but when I finished a question he would look up and say something like yes, that's correct, or "I see what your saying, that's a good question," and finally "Yes, if you use that data structure you get [Horrendous run time]." (I hypothesized this in my question) As a result, I rewrote my code trying to use different data structures, and I changed the fundamental algorithms I was using.

When my program still was not working today, I went to my professor's office hours, and ended up asking basically the same questions. It turned out that they were not, in fact, good questions, but were based on fundamental misunderstandings of the material, and in particular, the data structure I was talking about is exactly what is used and it gets a very good run time. (But my understanding of how to process the data was way off). Once my professor cleared this up, I rewrote my code and now it works.

In retrospect, I think the TA wasn't listening at all to my questions, and was just saying yes until I left. This had a serious negative impact on me, as I rewrote code that was on the right track and pored time into debugging, only to have to throw it all away.

So my question is: should I tell the professor about this, or just walk away? If it matters, the student will likely be TA again next semester.

Yes, tell the professor about it. You shouldn't make a huge deal out of it, but send a brief, neutral e-mail saying that you were given wrong information in the office hours, that you got the impression the student was distracted and not really listening to what you said, and maybe ask how you can ensure that you do not waste time on red herrings next time.

If it's a one-off, and the student just had a bad day or a pressing deadline, it shouldn't have a big impact, but if other students also report similar problems the prof may watch the TA's performance a bit more closely, and may even decide to hire a different TA next year.

End-of-semester evaluations are also a good place to note this kind of experience. In my university the TAs even get their own evaluation form.


Scientific Author Ranking Services In the Economics profession, there is a free service called RePEc:

https://ideas.repec.org/

This service, amongst other things, ranks the top 5% of registered authors over a number of metrics (their publication number, citation, impact factor etc).

I'm wondering whether other fields (e.g., biology, physics) have a similar service which ranks top contributors to their fields.

Many thanks.

Thomson Reuters does that for all fields: http://highlycited.com/.


Graduate courses as undergrad vs master's degree I am roughly in the following situation (field: physics/mathematics, location: Europe):
I have enough credits to finish my undergraduate degree this year if I want to. I can also choose to stay as an undergrad for another year.
I have done almost all undergraduate courses at my university that interest me, so I would be doing graduate courses 90% of the time.
With some extra work, I could obtain a master's degree at my university. However, I could also apply for a PhD program immediately after finishing undergrad next year, without getting a master's degree first.

Not counting research experience, is it advantageous to 'formalize' one's graduate courses by getting a master's degree, from the viewpoint of career opportunities?

I am not sure about this because on the one hand, a master's degree may give other people a better indication of one's ability, but on the other hand admissions committees and such may be more demanding from students with a master's degree.

Not counting research experience, is it advantageous to 'formalize' one's graduate courses by getting a master's degree, from the viewpoint of career opportunities?

For industry, yes, it is advantageous to get the Master's degree if you're doing basically the same work.  The Master's degree is generally considered a terminal professional degree for many industries, so there's some value in getting that rather than just a Bachelor's degree.

For academia, no, it's typically not advantageous.  Most US-based PhD programs will require you to do core coursework roughly equivalent to a Master's degree regardless of whether or not you already have one.  (I do not know enough about European programs to comment on them.)  They will also typically present you with an opportunity to earn a Master's on the way to your PhD.  Thus, getting one before you start a PhD program at another university is, perhaps, redundant.  The only exception is if you are planning to switch your focus a bit.  For example, you might get a Master's in Public Health and then start a PhD program in Computer Science focusing on applying computer science research to public health problems.

You also mentioned that you were interested in a PhD, but wanted solid letters of recommendation so that you could have a reasonable chance at a top university.  The best way to do this may not be through coursework.  Obviously, coursework is important, but you may find that working with a research group as an undergrad allows you to more closely interact with a faculty member and get a more personal letter of recommendation.  Professors write letters of recommendation for students based on coursework all the time, but it's more rare for them to write one for an undergraduate with whom they have worked on research projects.  Also, this would allow you to determine whether or not you enjoy research and learn a bit more about what you would like from a graduate school.  Research is quite different from coursework.  It's more of a career than a school experience.


Should I publish or present in academic conferences before doing science outreach? I have just finished fieldwork and the media and the community I’ve been working with want me to give a talk on preliminary results. Should I first present data to colleagues?

That is often not necessary and often unpractical, but there are risks involved. The media and local actors need information now while academia works on a slower time scale. So by the time you finished the discussion in academia (if it ever finishes), the media and local actors will often have lost interest.

However, the risk is that preliminary results often contain errors. Often there are also legal and moral issues (e.g. privacy) you need to take into account. All this will differ to a huge extend depending on e.g. the subject of the study, the design of the study, and geographical context. So the best advise we can give you is to discuss this with your advisor.


How to salvage a rejected paper when you don't have time to correct it? I just submitted a paper to a conference.  The reviewers gave me their responses only two days before the deadline to resubmit the paper.  They seemed to indicate that my paper was on topic, and had good preliminary results, but they seemed to indicate that it was lacking more results.  I understand it, and I think they're probably right, but I really don't have the time to invest much more time into this particular paper.  My advisor thinks that I should invest my time in other research endeavors, but I don't really want to abandon a paper that i've already invested a lot of time in.

What should you do when you want to salvage a paper but don't have time to correct it?

One piece of advice-I-would-not-follow is to submit the paper to a lower quality conference. This could really be a waste of time if the conference is of very low quality, and if you are really proud of the work, do not do this. In the end, this may even look like a black spot on your CV.

What are you doing this weekend? Maybe canceling those plans and using the time to obtain the additional results. Then improve the paper based on the reviewer comments (evenings and other weekends) and resubmit to the next suitable venue.

Another alternative is to get help, either from a colleague or maybe even an undergraduate, if it is easy enough to the him/her how to run your experiments. Reward them with co-authorship, even if they haven't written a word of the paper. (This won't hurt you any.)

Ultimately, you cannot get something for nothing.


What standards should I apply when evaluating a PhD thesis from a weaker university? I have been asked to serve on the examination committee for a PhD thesis. It's in the area of machine learning. It's from a university in a developing country. My job is to provide a written report, recommending whether to award the degree (possibly with minor or major changes), or even not to proceed to defence. I won't be participating in the defence itself.
The quality is very bad. I would say it would receive a low grade, if evaluated as a 3-month MSc dissertation, in my university (in a developed country, but not a top-tier university). It's bad in every respect - novelty, experimental design, understanding, motivation, contact with literature, writing, reliance on "predatory" journals, even some (fairly benign) plagiarism. So, my instinct is to recommend it should not proceed to the defence.
My problem is that standards vary between countries and between institutions. How much allowance should I make for this? I do not want to perpetuate a "vicious cycle" which prevents high-quality work in developing countries (eg Breaking the (perhaps perceived) academic (poverty) cycle).
Part of my problem is that I don't know how much weight my report will carry. Maybe the department is used to receiving harsh reports from international committee members, and de-weights them. Or maybe a harsh report from an international member is enough for an immediate fail.
If I could allocate the blame in my review, I would say the supervisor surely deserves most of it. But it is the student who will suffer the most, if they fail. On the other hand, perhaps the supervisor's own PhD was the beneficiary of some lenient reviewing in the past, leading them not to know what standards are expected. I should not perpetuate that cycle either.
I hope my question does not sound condescending or insulting to scholarship in developing countries. I know that great research is done everywhere, and I have great respect for many individual researchers from the country in question.
Edit: of course, there are no right answers here, but I accepted @anon's answer because the "PhD = passport to worldwide community" concept was the most helpful in my thinking. In the end, I wrote a fully honest review from my point of view, and recommended it should not go to defence, but I added a note that I understand the local committee will apply the institutions' own standards. It goes without saying that I was constructive, not negative, and gave a lot of advice for accessible improvements. Thanks to all for a useful discussion!

I suggest that you remember that you are evaluating the work, not its author, or the supervisor, or the university. Give it an honest evaluation, based only on what you see before you. If it doesn't measure up to your standards, then say so. Say why. Make suggestions if you have the time. But honesty is required.
One of the reasons, actually, for international reviewers is to give the home institution some assurance that they are producing students on a par with others.


A potential PhD supervisor wants me to visit campus for an interview before I know if I'm accepted I've been in correspondence via email with a potential PhD supervisor who has agreed to take me on. After a few emails back and forth and polishing my proposal with his guidance I submitted my application per his instructions. He suggested we interview after I submitted my application. It's been a little over 2 weeks since I submitted. He suggested either a Skype interview or a visit to the campus. Visiting the campus would mean I would have to book some plane tickets. They're relatively cheap since it's within the UK but I'm also on a budget and don't know if I'm going to get accepted or if the interview is required for a decision on my application. I suggested a Skype interview and then during the interview we could arrange a visit on campus but he countered with an offer to just visit the campus during the last week of the month. I was confused so I agreed I could visit campus but asked for him to clarify or provide some guidance on the application process and never heard back from him. I still haven't bought plane tickets and am not sure how to interpret this series of events. Should I just explain my situation to him and ask for a Skype interview? When I agreed on a visit I told him when I would be able to fly out but haven't heard anything so I'm really not sure about buying plane tickets. It all seemed like things were going along smoothly but now I'm very confused. Any suggestions?

The solution here is honesty and candor. You should explain that you would like to visit the campus, but that your financial situation doesn't allow it at the moment. Any reasonable person would either drop the suggestion of a campus visit, or find some money to pay for your travel expenses. Any other reaction would be a red flag.


Issues with Former Academic Advisor I'm currently a sophomore in undergraduate college who is just recently became a business administration major and I was undeclared for my freshman year and part of my sophomore year. Once my old advisor signed my paperwork about changing majors, I asked him when I would be graduating since I was genuinely curious and to reaffirm a fact that he said in an earlier appointment that I would graduate in the winter semester. However, he stated that I would need a fifth year and proceeded to harshly demand why I took classes in CJA, education, and had taken other gen ed's. When I reminded him that he did say I would graduate in the winter semester, he did not believe me and told me to give up on graduating in the spring with my other fellow classmates. I explained to my former advisor my reasons why I took said classes, because I was undeclared, yet he refused to believe me. To be honest, I was caught off guard by his behavior since in my last appointment with him, he was cordial and polite towards me. After my appointment with him, I began to lose self confidence in my choice for this major and I was confused by his harsh attitude towards me. After that harsh exchange, I transferred to a new advisor who is helpful and keeps me motivated but I am still bothered because I do not know why did my former advisor decide to say those harsh words to me. Any ideas behind my former advisor's behavior?

Any ideas behind my former advisor's behavior?

Maybe he is a bozo. Maybe he had a bad day. Maybe he misunderstood the situation. What does it matter? You have found a new advisor and moved on with your life.

I would have just voted to close ("help me guess what he was thinking" questions are off-topic here), but I think there is a real issue in your post, and I think it's this line:

  I asked him when I would be graduating since I was genuinely curious

You should not be "asking" this question! As you've discovered, advisors make mistakes all the time -- it's very common for undergraduate students to stay longer than they expected (and pay extra) because their advisor made a mistake. Instead, you should look up all the classes you need for your major (including gen eds) and make a plan for when you will take each of them. Your advisor (the good one) can help you with this, but any mistakes will hurt you, not your advisor, so it's on you to get this right.

Good luck!


What are the potential pitfalls of having a PhD? This question follow's JeffE's comment here:

  In most industries, a PhD has negative value.

I am curious about what potential negatives there may be with having a PhD, particularly in industries.  For example, my PhD has applications for image sensors, and the potential of working in that field is appealing—would having a PhD be a potential barrier? Would it be a case of how explicit the practicalities of the PhD can be made?  Would this make any difference?

Though a Ph.D is not necessarily a disadvantage, depending on the field and the nature of the Ph.D, it may also not be as competitive as the equivalent number of years in industry.
Think from a perspective of a hiring dev team leader who needs a good systems engineer yesterday to help integrate some obscure API from a vendor into their product. You're choosing between a pile of resumes.
On one, you have a candidate who has 3 years as a junior engineer in a company that worked on image sensors, 2 years of work as a systems developer II, and one year as a lead developer on a computer vision project. He's delivered seven projects in total and has worked in a highly cross-functional team of hardware and software engineers, salespeople, and on-site support staff. The products he worked on brought the company revenue of $86.3 million dollars over seven years.
On another, you have a candidate who has done 6 years in a Ph.D and 1 year worth of internships in total. He's worked on a computer vision project and has contributed a novel algorithm to solving "Line tracing under low UV light conditions" (I made that up, I have no idea if that's a real problem in computer vision), and has written six publications. He also has taught a course on 3rd year systems programming and has TAed robotics three times.
While they are both good candidates, chances are that unless you need someone who does "line tracing under UV light", the first candidate might be more attractive. Less training, less having to work with that person to integrate them into a product-based flow, proven record of delivering product and making sales, etc...
I personally feel that the "disadvantage" of a Ph.D is more about opportunity cost than an actual disadvantage. In many cases, the culture of academia vs. industry are different enough that it's like switching fields even if the technologies are similar. Basically, someone with 7 years actual work experience has enough to basically go from a new grad hire to a project team lead, whereas someone with 7 years of Ph.D is proven to deliver in an academic setting but not in a for-profit product-based one. However, at the same time, there are many industries that want to have Ph.Ds on their staff as well because they are long-term, deep thinkers who are rigorous and detailed.


Methodology Question: How to deal with others having written about similar topic? Basically, I am wondering how one is to deal with other scholars that have written about a similar topic or have covered similar/the same phenomenon (my field are the social sciences/humanities). What I will obviously do at the beginning of a chapter is to discuss the literature that has previously covered the events I wish to write about and explain how I will discuss/interpret these events differently in the article/chapter. But I am wondering whether in the unfolding of my argument that follows, I have to cite these works again for every minor point that others might have made about this topic?

I guess it is difficult to give an example of such minor points, but if I discuss the same phenomenon or historical events that others have covered before, I am bound to make certain minor obvious points that others have made before, even though my overall argument/interpretation is different. The same goes for such minor obvious points that are made in the literature that is only distantly related (thus not necessarily appearing in my literature review).

The Turabian says the following:

  "7.9.3 Usually Cite a Source for Ideas Not Your Own. This rule is more
  complicated than it seems, because most of our own ideas are based on
  or derived from identifiable sources somewhere in history. Readers
  don't expect you to findevery distant source for every familiar idea,
  but they do expect you to cite the source for an idea when (1) the
  idea is associated with a specific person and (2) it's new enough not
  to be part of a field's common knowledge."

However, there is of course a large grey area to this. I would not say that the minor points I mean are in any way tied to a specific person, but whether that would mean I do not have to provide a footnote every time there is even a slight parallel point that I make. I understand that I could still simply always provide a footnote in such cases, but in practice that looks rather silly and it does not seem to be the case that other scholars in my field provide such citations for such minor points.

Thanks for your help.

There are a number of issues here, including the purpose of your writing and who you see as the audience.

Don't however, lose sight of the fact that copyright applies to words (etc.) but not to ideas and concepts. History is full of examples of people coming to the same (or quite different) conclusions independently based on the same evidence - especially when that evidence is common knowledge.

If you are writing for (potential) scholars it is probably better to give a lot of citations so that others can follow up and expand their knowledge of the field. I would prefer end-notes to foot-notes, however, as they are less disruptive of the page flow.

If you are writing for popular consumption (a la Carl Sagan) you don't need to reference everything and your description of an introduction seems about right. You could, when writing, also have an appendix in which you point to the work of others who have discussed similar themes whether they come to similar conclusions or not.

However, if you have to err, it is probably better to err (a bit or a lot) on the side of referencing related work that you know about. The fact that you know about it means that it may have had an effect on your own thinking and you should honor that in general.

I think that when you are coming to different conclusions than others it might be especially useful to you to cite the work of others. Again, this is more important in scientific/professional writing than in the popular press. If nothing else this gives you the aura of fairness and leaves no one with a misconception that you were trying to mislead them.

So, what is required to say and what is useful to say may not be quite the same.


How is student feedback dealt with for poorly teaching faculty? I teach at a teaching university. Research is not a priority. I'm new to the university and am teaching full-time.  I believe I've developed a rapport with the current cohort of senior students.

During one our classes, the discussion moved to the teaching of other faculty. This is a group of seniors who are likely to graduate at the end of the semester.

The students made several very concerning things about other faculty:

They download labs from other universities and these labs cannot be run on the equipment we have. When asked about it, they state ... I'm  retiring soon, let's just do it..
They publicly abuse individual students for stupidity.
They make assessment available through the content management system without mentioning its existence to the students during class.

Apart from end-of-semester student feedback, there doesn't seem to be any way to address such poor teaching (or even investigate whether the student views are correct).

What do other places do? Is it at a department level? Dean level? Is it a separate organization?

I can't do anything directly for the current cohort of students, but it would be good to try to move towards clear mechanisms for improving faculty teaching.

There are several mechanisms we have that in theroy should deal with this sort of thing:

All academics must have their teaching observed by another member of staff at least once a year, but ideally once a module. All academics must observe someone else teaching once a year. When this happens a form must be filled in that says what the observed could improve and what the observer learnt that they will implement in their own teaching.

We have a pretty good staff-student committee where concerns by students can and are raised. We also have student representatives on our departmental teaching committee (see this answer).

How effective these are is varied. Student surveys make up a big part of who a department is ranked in national rankings, which determines how many students we can recruit. Management in the UK can exert quite a lot of pressure on offenders because there is no such thing as tenure in the UK (although all workers are protected from sacking to a greater extent than in the US).

But this can be ineffective if: A staff member is important to the department/university for another reason (e.g. very high research income), or the staff member is just so over worked and stressed, that they give up the will to do well irrespective of the consequences - this is increasingly common as enrollments fall and management tries to force more work out of fewer people with less resources. If a staff member were protected by the fact you are leaving soon anyway (it takes up to a year to get rid of someone), I'd say there is not much to be done.


How do I tell if the content of an academic conference is available? A post on an official site gives Abstract Details about a presentation.

However I didn't see a link to see or buy the full content.

How do I tell if the content of this presentation is available?

Availability varies of course. In some cases the conference has a (permanent) website that might detail such information. Or at least it can give you access to the program chair who can answer the question.

For conferences hosted by major professional organizations, there is probably a general policy, and even an established library. This is the case for ACM (Association for Computing Machinery) conferences.

But you can also contact the authors of the work. Even if the conference provides no repository, the authors can probably give you more information. Don't be hesitant about asking.


Advisor asking to cite his works in my thesis. Not sure if the right thing to do I am currently writing my thesis, and so far I've mentioned some well known related artcles focusing on a certain family of methods. My advisor has also published a similiar work, which is not influential or as diverse compared to other methods - the work also focuses more on utilization aspect rather than benchmark one.

My advisor wants me to mention his work - I feel it would be a little out of place in my thesis, unless I mention some older not necessarily state-of-the-art methods. What should I do?

EDIT: I forgot to mention that this is a master thesis. Aside from that, what feels wrong to me is not having a choice to comply or not with the request and treating citations as a currency. It's a small thing, but if it weren't my advisor I would probably refuse.

You are working on that subject because your advisor has worked on sth. similar, aren't you. His mentoring will have been based on that work. By not mentioning it you would be hiding valuable information from the reader.


Query regarding permission for Indian to work as postdoc in UK I am applying for a Postdoc in an UK University. They are asking whether I have permission to work in UK. How can I know my eligibility to work as Postdoc in UK? What type of visa issued by UK for postdocs?

Detail:

  The University of Bath is a sponsor under the Points Based System. Where there are no suitable applicants from within the EEA, we may, depending on the position, be able to issue a Certificate of Sponsorship.
  For further information, please refer to the UK Border Agency website (new window).

  Please select one of the following options*

  I am a British Citizen/EEA National.
  I am not a British Citizen/EEA National and I am not currently eligible to work in the UK.
  I am not a British Citizen/EEA National, but I am eligible to work in the UK. Please give the reason below.

The EEA is the EU plus a number of other European countries (eg Norway) whose citizens have employment rights in the UK. Assuming you're not a dual citizen, option 1 won't apply to you.

If you do not have any reason to assume you are eligible to work in the UK (eg you don't already have a UK work visa) then you should tick opiton 2 - "I am not currently eligible". It is very unlikely that you would have eligibility without already knowing the reasons for it (eg "I already have a work visa").

Then (as @scaaahu says) read this answer to find out how the system works after this point. The important thing to remember is that the university is potentially able to sponsor you to get a visa, so ticking "no" won't stop the application. If they decide to take you, they will be able to take care of the visa issues.

Good luck with the application.


Can I reasonably move universities every few years for professional work? My real love is scientific computing, but I'm generally interested in nearly every academic field — through undergrad I've had research computing positions in social psychology, electrical engineering, volcanology, and pharmaceutical sciences. Now I've graduated, and I'm at a different university doing data analysis in cognitive science. I like it, but I have a long list of places I'd like to live and fields I'd like to learn more about, and my "career plan" is to move every 3–4 years and work at a different university in a different field, always doing scientific computing/data science though. I'm not too concerned about getting a huge list of academic accolades or getting a PhD right now; I'd rather just be doing interesting work.

I've mentioned this to several professors and graduate students who have asked about my plans, and they always react as if I've said I want to run off and join the circus. Is there some truth to how they react? Am I hurting my career this way?

I'd like to clarify that I just want to be doing data analysis. It seems like nearly every lab needs people to do this, so I don't see how I'm a funding leech.

As a data scientist myself, I have found it rather difficult to be a journeyman data scientist in academia. Yes, people need their data analysed; no, they do not want to pay for your full salary, benefits, and office space. Nor are they necessarily going to hire an outsider to analyse their data. They can get their postdocs/grad students to do it.

I have met repeated resistance to being taken onto projects as an outside data analyst. Certain STEM disciplines are especially bad with this. Because I have a PhD, I can find full time positions that allow me to be housed in a department, teach classes in that department, and then take on outside projects as I find them. These outside projects are never enough in and of themselves to provide enough work for me to retain my job. The fact that I can do independent research and teach classes is what allows me to do what I do.

I just think being a journeyman data analyst in academia can be a rather tough life, and you may not have much freedom to actually decide what type of subjects you are exploring. In my experience, you may rank below even the master's students and will possibly be paid subsistence level pay.


Could I arrange random gifts for the participants in my research? I've seen in many research projects that they give people who fill the questionnaires or participate in the experiment (more often the latter) some amount of money to acknowledge their help. But I can't pay that much because it's a small project. But also I want to attract many people to fill my online questionnaire. Is that right (according to research ethics or anything else) to say to them that I will give only random gifts, for example only 10 gifts when more than 500 people participate?
My concern is that the participants subjective perception that they will receive the gain for their participation is not true (in terms of probability) and maybe I'm cheating on them, in a sense ?

Questionnaire design is a science.

Within that science, there is a body of literature on the ethics of incentives, and on maximising response rates. Behavioural economists and other social scientists have put a lot of work into this: you just need to make best use of their findings.

Just because questionnaire design looks easy, and lots of people do it shoddily, doesn't mean you should. Apply to questionnaire- and incentive-design the same academic rigour that you will apply to the analysis of the results.

In other words: the answer to your question is in the literature, so consult it: and then you've got some proper peer-reviewed literature to cite in your methodology section. And discuss the ethics with your university's committee and with your more experienced colleagues.


As a PhD student, should I list a conference travel grant in CV? I know there is a similar question here (Should PhD students mention small grants on their CV?) but there is a slight difference between my question and this.

I recently went to a conference as a student. The conference awards a travel grant for some participating students. This stipend is based in part on need (e.g., distance), but it is also based on level of participation, i.e. merit--only students who presented a full paper at the conference got it (as opposed to an abstract or workshop paper).

Are things like this worth listing on the CV of a starting PhD student, or should I not bother? A follow up question, if it turns out that it's good to list this, is how to list it.

I would suggest listing the participation, but not the grant. At the point you are, starting the doctoral studies, it will have little to no effect in any case and by the time the CV becomes more important you should have more substantial things to list.

Alternatively, if you list the participation and simply note (funded) after the reference, it would be fine, I think. But don't try to make it sound like more than it is.


Choosing course reading materials for students I'm planning (somewhat technical, but not very technical) undergrad courses in the fall with relatively little lecturing in class, primarily using class time for group work and discussion (as explained in and as a follow-up to: How to motivate students to do readings).  I'm trying to choose reading material that students are more likely to read.

  Is there any evidence (preferably actual research, but ancedotal if necessary) that certain "formats" of required reading are more likely to be read by students?  Specifically I have in mind the following tete-a-tete's:

physical books versus e-books versus online notes
free versus low-priced versus expensive books
one long book versus several short books

One way to get students to read is to assign some sort of assessment in relation to the reading. It could be a quiz, project, paper, or whatever you believe is necessary. They must be required to do something with the knowledge they obtain from the reading in order to motivate them to read it. In many ways the assessment awakens a "need" in the student to read.

To ask today's student to read for the sake of knowledge often does not work. There are too many things competing for their time to read something they do not have have too.


When replicating results, what should I do when the author didn't use the method the paper said they did? I am replicating a model to report on how well it does on a new evaluation metric I am proposing. The method/hyperparameters of the model are given in a paper about it, where it breaks all benchmarks on the tasks on which it is being evaluated.

After that paper came out, several people tried to replicate the results, and found that they could not. Their questions of “Am I doing this right?” can be found on a online message board for the project. They got several responses from the second author of the paper (very well-known and respected in the field), saying that he didn’t carry out the experiments and that they would have to wait for a response from the first author.

Eventually the first author responded with just a few lines saying: “The hyperparameters to use are ....” People ran with those parameters and replicated the results.

However, the parameters he gave disagree with those reported in the paper.
Quite likely this is through no malicious intent: possibly the model was rerun and the changes were not re-incorporated into the draft.

Now, I would like my model when I am evaluating to be as similar as possible to the one in their paper. That way, people can compare my new proposed metric to the metric that that paper uses and see that this model is good at X, but less good at Y, without having to correct for the fact that the models are different.

I have three options:

Use what I think are good hyperparameters for their model (this is what I am currently doing).
Use the hyperparameters given in their paper.
Use the hyperparameters given in the online message board post, which actually achieve the results given in the paper.

Which of these three options is best?

Given that you don't have space enough to present all three sets of results, I would suggest that you choose the parameters that best illustrate the scientific point that you are aiming to make.

When you state the parameters, however, you should add a parenthetical note or footnote that says something along the lines of:

  Note that we have chosen these parameters because [REASON].  Alternative parameters given [in the original paper / by the author] produce results that are [better / worse].

This balances the openness of making sure the reader is aware of the choice you have made and its consequences, while at the same time restricting your presentation space budget to only the most relevant set of results.


Can't prepare lesson material. Should I cancel class? I'm a grad student teaching assistant for a freshmen undergrad non major multivariable  calculus class.

What they didn't tell me is that the second half of the semester is not calculus but "finite math". This week's topic is game theory, which I've never learned myself.

In preparing tomorrow's material, I realized I was getting all the answers wrong from one of the sections, and have no idea how to do the problems I'm supposed to teach. Normally it only takes a day to read the textbook and prepare.

I've been up for hours struggling with the same problems and need to leave in 5 hours to get to class on time - and would still like to sleep.

My school never gave me any training or told me any rules; am I allowed to just cancel class?

I'll take any advice at this point.

Edit: I would just like to say how much I appreciate everyone's responses. I'm running on little sleep, (and extremely new to Stack Exchange so still learning how the site works) but you've all given me great ideas when I was truly stressing out.

Edit/Update: turns out I was not doing it incorrectly, just did algebraic work when I should've used a graph so I considered points that I didn't need to which is why my answers were wrong. I met up with the individual who TAd for the course last semester and that's how I figured out my mistake. I sorta winged it in presentation and got the correct answer, now just have to repeat the lesson for the rest of the sessions.

Thank you all for your input.

Edit (from comment): Game theory is just one week of the course; they have two lectures with the professor prior to one 50 minute session with me. This is the only session with me out of a year long course that has been or will be like this.

I would like to add on top of the answers of @aparente001 and @Anonymous Mathematician.

So, first thing, in 5 hours it would be very hard to come up with something solid that you would be comfortable lecturing about; thus I second the suggestion of doing some review and exercises for now.

My opinion is: you can do it.

If you have been teaching calculus so far, chances are that you are a very competent student. You can learn almost at the same time as you will be teaching. And this does not have to be a stressful experience, I would say you can be upfront with your students and let them know that you are learning at the same time as them (they already know that you are a student too).

Actually, this can be beneficial for both parts: you) are learning a new topic and because of that you better understand the difficulties that students may come upon; they) have a TA that understands their difficulties and that is able to explain things in a way that a student would learn (it may not be the best way, but I would say that is OK).

In the case they make you questions you do not know how to answer, again, be upfront: say that it is a good question, you will think and research about it, and you will explain it later, either in the class, e-mail directly to the student, whatever you prefer.

In order for this to work, like mentioned in the other answers, you have to talk to your supervisor and let him know that you were not prepared to lecture this topic. Ask him for help about learning those concepts, or a reference to whom could provide such guidance.


My undergraduate supervisor is giving me very little help I am a  student in my final year of an undergraduate programme. The majority of the credits going towards my degree are weighted on a lab based thesis which is supervised by a very time constrained professor. We are supposed to be working almost all day in the lab under instruction from our supervisor.
However they are always close to an hour late whenever we are supposed to meet. When they do arrive, they are so rushed they say something small to do and give very little explanation and then leave. There is no structure and the majority of the time I am left without work to do.
The thesis is hugely important to me as I would like a career in the field.

I don't know how to approach them. I want to start progressing more with my project but it is difficult trying change thing someone who is partially grading my thesis and I am unsure of the best way to go about this.
Any help would be greatly appreciated.

Let me suggest polite collective action. Have a group of you, maybe three, go to the prof during some scheduled time and just present the case that you need more direction and ask them to find a way to provide it. Or alternatively, a way to be a success without it.

Try to present it as a need, not as a complaint. The prof may also be dissatisfied with the amount of supervision they can give. You are generous in your assessment, and this will help. But the prof does owe you proper supervision under the circumstances you describe.


Is it OK to use fonts, i.e bold, italic, in an email to a professor or to any other academic? Is it acceptable or appropriate to use fonts, i.e bold, italic, in an email to an academic in order to do emphasise or organise the text ?

or would it be perceived as offensive ?

I think this cartoon answers best your question

In summary, unless absolutely necessary, use a plain text. I you feel you need to organise your text it means your email already too long. If it is a draft of the paper, use an attachment.


Dealing with intern supervisor who underestimates my abilities I am an undergraduate student who got into a voluntary internship for a year in my department.

Without going into much detail, I'm a trainee in the lab where programming lessons are held with lots of computers available for the students(Teaching Lab).

The main problem of concern is that my supervisor, who also happens to be the administrator of the lab, does not seem to believe in my abilities and underestimates my intelligence, which I can't understand why.

When I signed up for the internship I submitted my resume, followed by a short interview from the university. I can say I got the job easily mainly due to my background.

I was hoping that I was going to work on something productive, like a research project. On the contrary, my supervisor seems to be very lazy and constantly assigns chores to me (cleaning, being his personal mailman on the university etc).

At the start since he found out I was bored he suggested to study some basic HTML (Fact is, I worked as a professional web developer some time ago!). If I reply that the tasks he sets for me are easy, he gets mad and tries to get me wrong so that he can show that I have no idea what I'm talking about.

Professors who knew me before and visited the lab asked my supervisor to offer me some motivation for extended bibliography and some more productive learning. He answered that if I have the right foundations then we can negotiate for something more productive! (Yet, he only has one paper, published 20 years ago).

What are your opinions on this? I was about to withdraw due to boredom but I only have some months left. Should I talk to a professor about this topic? Am I expecting too much or am overqualified?

I don't say this lightly, but given everything you've said: I think you should probably quit the internship, or at least present the prospect of that to your supervisor.

Some key points:

1) You say it's a "voluntary internship".  Well, all academic internships are voluntary (I hope!), so I think what you mean is that you are a volunteer, i.e., unpaid.  [Added: I just looked this up, and apparently this phrase is quite common in parts of the anglophone world outside of North America.  Sorry.]

2) You wrote

  I was hoping that I was going to work on something productive, like a research project.

That is a very reasonable expectation for a volunteer internship.  However, the parameters of the job seem to be very different:

  I'm a trainee in the lab where programming lessons are held with lots of computers available for the students.

But that doesn't sound research-related at all: it sounds like you're in a teaching lab, not a research lab.  If you were actually doing the training, you'd be some kind of TA...without pay.  Unfortunately:

  On the contrary, my supervisor...constantly assigns chores to me (cleaning, being his personal mailman on the university etc).

Having to clean up a laboratory space after using it is very reasonable.  In my branch of the academic world at least (North America), cleaning up after other people is a paid job, not part of an internship.  Similarly, mail delivery is the sort of thing for which someone is usually paid an hourly wage.  If you are doing some of this and some of something else, it might be okay if the something else were especially attractive and rewarding.  But given that you're not, it sounds to me that you're simply being exploited.  Certainly I would feel that way if I were you.

  Yet, he only has one paper, published 20 years ago.

Yikes.  So the professor is probably not even research-active, or at least not to the level necessary for it to be plausible that he is the head of some kind of research team.  He is not a good choice to supervise your research.  In view of everything else you've said, I'm afraid that it seems likely that the business about your having a "proper foundation" -- especially in the context of his willful ignorance of the skills that you already have -- is just an excuse.

I would go to this professor and say that there's been a misunderstanding.  You thought you were getting involved in a research internship, and as it hasn't panned out that way, you'd like to give notice.  If he wants to change your mind, have him mention not just the prospect of future research "when you're ready", but actually nail down research that you can get started on right away.

It would also be good to speak to at least one of the other faculty members you've mentioned.  I don't know where in the world you're writing from, so it's possible that your local academic culture is very different from mine.  But unless you find out that it would be a big bridge-burning mistake to quit your internship, I think you should be angling for that outcome.


Put a half-baked paper in arXiv for the purpose of documentation I'm sure this has been asked before, but I didn't find it.

I have been working on a side project for some time, but I don't have the time to make the final evaluations to make it into a peer-reviewed-worthy paper. However, I do think it has merit and I wouldn't want it going to waste.

Is publishing in arXiv for this purpose considered acceptable?

Thank you.

ArXiv.org is a preprint server.  It is not intended for your purposes.

Even though people do upload all kinds of documents (half baked ideas, their PhD thesis, lecture notes, ...), I personally think it inappropriate.

You might consider putting it on your website, or even emailing it to people who are likely to be interested.  Or, make time to finish it!


Is it accepted to cite an entire issue of a journal? There exist review journals that every now and then publish a thematic issue on a given topic. For example, Chemical Reviews does so: one thematic issue (see e.g. this one) includes an editorial and a number of invited review on the main topic.

When writing the introduction of a research paper, one can start by summing up the recent developments in the field, and then explain the reasoning behind the paper being written (“People have looked at application of molecules X and Y to reactions A, B and C, but so far noöne has evidenced any benefit of using them for reaction D. We here show that they lead to a spectacular 270% improvement over current yields”). When writing the broader part of the introduction, one might be tempted to include many references to recent reviews on the topic. However, when many reviews come from the same thematic issue of a journal, it becomes a bit ridiculous. So…

Is it an accepted practice to include a reference to an entire issue of a journal?

  Special issue of Chem. Rev. on “Giant molecules for catalysis”, 2010, issue 8.

Alternatively, is it adequate to cite the editorial of the thematic issue? Or do individual papers need to be cited, at the risk of making a long string of citations? Like so:

  Lots of research has focused on applications of these molecules to A[1], B[2], C[3], D[4], E[5] and F[6]

where refs. 1-6 are all to sequential papers in the same issue of the same journal.

It seems tempting to cite only the issue of a journal when it contains several articles that you want to refer to from your introduction. Especially so if it is a special issue directly related to your paper. As to your question whether it is an accepted practice, I haven't seen so, but it could depend on the field of research of course.

Personally, I would advise against using such citations for two main reasons:

You should always try to cite as specific as possible. If you support a stated fact with a citation, the reader should be directed to this fact as directly as possible. In your example of the giant molecules, a reader may be more interested in application A than in giant molecules in general, so it will be helpful if you cite more specifically.
Citations are the basis for many measures of academic impact, and I doubt that citations to journal issues are counted in these measures. The authors of the articles that you intend to cite with a reference to a whole journal issue will certainly not be pleased with this, because you restrain a source of academic reputation for them.


What are the standard workloads for mathematics TAs at state and private universities in the US? I am an international student, and now pursuing my Ph.D in pure Math in a not very good (ranking 70+) and relatively small state university in U.S.
As usual, I am a supported TA, and I am wondering whether the teaching load here is too heavy.
The department supports about 50 TAs in total. There are two types of TA here. For those who have not passed the Speak Test (which is another awful thing), they can only serve as graders, and are expected to work 12 hours in grading hws per week. For those who passed the Speak Test, they have to teach 3 or 4 sessions of recitation every semester.
Based on my experience, I feel so tired after a whole week's work as TA that I have little time or energy to do research. And I once heard that in some (private) universities, a typical TA job consists only teaching two recitations per academic year...
My questions are the following. (To be precise, I only care about a TA duty in math major.)

What does a typical TA duty (especially the working hours) look like in a state university and in a private university? Especially, is it true that a TA in a state university usually works longer in his/her TA duty than the one in the private university?

Is the TA duty here reasonable compared with other state universities?

Not sure if this data point is really deserving of being an answer, but:

I graduated from a top-25 math department at a fairly large state university 5 years ago.  The standard TA assignment was 4 lower-division recitations (e.g. calculus) per semester.  Our contract permitted us to be assigned up to 20 hours of teaching duties per week, though most weeks the assigned duties took significantly fewer hours.  Students working as TAs for advanced courses (upper-division or graduate) were usually assigned 2 recitations, but were also expected to grade homework, etc.

So what you describe doesn't sound totally out of line, unless you are spending considerably more hours per recitation.