APA: Citing an annual report over multiple years I have looked everywhere for an answer to this question. I don't often use APA format. In Chicago, when referencing in-text an annual report over a span of years, one simply types: (Smith, multiple years). I'm referencing an economic report, published annually, to analyse performance over a span of six years. Must I create a separate reference for each year, or may I do the same as in Chicago?
Best guess is the reference will look like:
Smith, J. (2002-2016) Annual Report
OR
Smith, J. (Multiple years) Annual Report

I don't work in APA much, but in the several papers I have had published the journal has had particular requirements for special cases like that. Step one would be to reach out to the editor of your chosen publication.
In the mean time I would probably cite them separately.

  Smith, J. (2002) Annual Report
   Smith, J. (2003) Annual Report
   Smith, J. (2004) Annual Report
   etc.

with the in text citation (Smith, 2002, 2003, 2004 ... ). I find it preferable to include too much detail and be asked to scale back than vice versa.


Second attempt at PhD I couldn't complete the PhD at the end of third year because of unsatisfactory progress. That was three years ago. Now I am again thinking of applying for a PhD. The application requires an up to date CV. I am wondering how to mention about the previous PhD study and whether it is worthwhile at all to make such an attempt. I would be grateful for your valuable suggestions.

Yes, you must include it in your CV. Concealing it could result in all sorts of trouble later.

Your cover letter or statement of purpose should explain what went wrong last time and what will be different this time around. For example, you could discuss the job vs. studies uncertainty you had last time, contrasted with your current intention to retire and study heart and soul.

For the age concern, see How old is too old for a PhD?. In particular, I did my PhD after retirement, in my 50's, and have no regrets.


How to deal with alma mater pushing crack science? I am aware that in US there is controversial support of facilitated communication and every public is dealing with a different kind of process.

The European university and faculty where I finished my BSc are very good and respected.
However, they have begun to push an agenda against an industry project due to environmental concerns. More specifically, the student association opposes the project and tenure-track staff and lecturers from the biology and ecology departments started to support this cause.
All of this is not based on evidence.

How can I stop and intervene in the matter of my alma mater? This is reputation-damaging as it not appropriate for an educational, academic, and research institution to spread such non-sensical ideas.

Do not intervene.  It won't work, and may damage you.

Political and ecological matters can be highly divisive.  No project has zero impact, so even if everybody agrees about the facts, strong disagreements in the balancing of pros and cons are likely to remain.  Therefore, the most likely outcome of trying to intervene is that you make enemies, without being one step closer to your desired outcome.  It is very unlikely that you will be able to convince students and faculty that they should change their opinion or actions on this.


Number of publications needed to get into a computer science PhD program? I've looked at the resumes of the type of candidates that get into computer science PhD programs at the top few universities (e.g. Stanford, MIT etc.) and a lot of them seem to have multiple publications (2-4) done during their undergraduate years. Is this representative of the entire pool? Or is this just a self-selected group that puts their resumes online.

I currently have one first-author workshop paper (5 pages), and I wonder how this might affect my chances at entry into these top universities.

You don't need any publications to get into a good Ph.D. program.  Publications are often slow, and it's an unexpected bonus for an undergraduate to have publications, not a necessity.

What is a necessity is to have strong reference letters attesting to your potential for research, and one of the best ways to get those is to get involved in research.  Being involved in research, in turn, will also tend to lead to publications.  Thus, you see the correlation.  Research and research-related activities that help a person into graduate school also tend to help cause that person to end up with publications.

In short: publications aren't the key, they are simply dependent on the same root cause.


Should my master's thesis be related to my future PhD research? I'm doing a master's degree in theoretical physics in Europe. After the end of the master, I want to pursue research in the area A. In fact, I've already come in contact with a professor that works in the area A in a different country.
The problem is, I'm struggling to find an advisor for a possible master thesis about the field A. I contacted roughly 6-7 professors at my university already and they either: 1) are too busy and don't want to start a new project, or 2) are not interested in what I want to do because they only accept projects strictly related to their recent research interests, or 3) don't answer my emails (after 2 weeks of waiting).
I'm considering to accept a master thesis in a different area B due to these reasons.
How would it be seen from the point of view of a prospective PhD advisor?

Can you ask your prospective PhD advisor? Surely it is not impossible to change areas between masters and PhD, but for some topics some earlier experience may be very helpful. So it depends.
As a supervisor, I'd not normally expect a PhD student to have worked in the same area before, although I had two PhD students who had done this, and it was actually a good thing; and in one case I wish a student would have learnt more about the area of their topic before the actual start, but you can do that even if your thesis is in a different field. Most students who "switched" had successful projects as well, so I wouldn't expect this to be a big problem, but there is still a possibility that a supervisor prefers a student with more experience in the same area, if available.


How to search for upcoming conferences that will be held in a specific subject What is the best way to search for conferences all over world? I need to participate in one in the near future.

By doing reasonable googling. As you didn't state your topic let me make an example when searching for conferences on magnetism. The operators I use should be self-explaining. Most conferences will be announced on websites of universities or mentioned, to exclude old ones search only within 2014..2014, and so on...

See also my other answer which has some links how to use google properly


Conversion programs resulting in a MSc I'm not familiar with the UK higher education system (I'm from a EU country) and this is confusing me a lot.
A friend of mine holds a master's degree in a completely unrelated field. He is now studying in UK, doing a so-called "conversion program" in computer science. It's a 1-year program which results in a MSc degree.
This is where I'm really confused. As the program is meant for people not having any knowledge of computer science, the subjects he's getting starts from the real basics (programming: if/else, loops,... databases, SQL: SELECT, WHERE, JOIN,...). Where I'm from, we would call this a "postgraduate" program which results in some kind of postgraduate degree. The concept of what is considered a master's degree here is that it follows up on a bachelors degree (a 3-year study), which is situated on level 7 of the European Qualifications Framework.
Currently, I'm taking a 1.5 years course on a bachelor's level in computer science as well (situated level 6), which is way more advanced than the basics he's getting and I will only receive an addendum on the bachelor's degree I currently hold already if I graduate. From what it looks like he's getting the subjects of a first year's bachelor (or undergraduate for the Americans reading this) program, still he'll be receiving an MSc degree at the end of the year.
I wonder how this is possible or how the UK education system works in this regard. This is not out of jealousy for my friend (I just hope he will be able to find a job he likes afterwards), however, he did get a little pissed off when I didn't understand how this can result in a MSc degree. I guess the UK education system is more different from ours than I thought.
Could someone shine some light on this matter? When I look around online, it seems many of these conversion programs are actually MSc programs. What are the different options for master's programmes in the UK (especially the "conversion" master's), how are they scructured and what value do they have for potential employers?

In the UK, postgraduate degrees are broken down into two categories Postgraduate Taught (PGT: MSc & MA mostly) and Postgraduate Research (PGR: MRes, MPhil & PhD).
Generally, any 180 credit course for which a Bachelors degree is an entry requirement is referred to as a "master's degree".
In science, where it is normal to go directly from BSc to PhD without a master's degree, master's degrees generally serve 3 purposes:

To provide more specialist training (often vocational) than is provided in a BSc. For example we have a MSc that qualifies people to work in human genetics diagnostics labs. While were have a module that covers the same general area in our undergrad Genetics degree, this is a whole year of just that very narrow subject. Or alternatively, a student with a computer science undergrad might do a databases masters - the degree title is much narrower than the undergrad equivalent.
To allow people whose Bachelor's degree isn't good enough for what they wish to do in the future to obtain a better qualification. You can often do a PhD in the British system without a masters degree as long as you get a good grade. But PhDs and almost all graduate jobs require good grades (grad jobs require a 2:1 in British speak, and PhDs formally require a 2:1, but you often need a 1st these days). If you don't get the grades you need, you can do a masters degree and have another chance at getting a good grade. The other people who take these sorts of masters are overseas students who want the cache that comes with having a degree from what they regard as a more famous/better regarded university.
Conversion courses. You've a bachelors in one subject, but decide you want to do something different. These degrees will generally have the same title as undergraduate degrees, and often have similar syllabuses, but compressed into 1x180 credits rather than 3x120 credits. These work on the basis that most the teaching at undergraduate level is not the course specific knowledge, but the transferable skills - you learn how to write, how to read, and how to think critically at a high level. Importantly, you also learn how to learn. The assumption is that if you turn this to a new subject, you will learn that new subject much faster than you learnt your first subject. For example, I had a friend who got a 1st class BA in Philosophy, and then did a genetics master's degree.

People in the know (recruiters and PhD admissions panels) will be able to tell what sort of master's degree a particular MSc is. If you have a BA in philosophy, and a MSc in genetics, no one is going to expect you to know as much about molecular cytogenetics as someone with a BA in genetics and MSc in human molecular diagnostics, but if you were both going for a PhD in population genetics, you might be on a similar footing.


Finding scholarship in England I am a master's graduate from Iran. I received an admission offer (PhD in business) from one of the reputable universities in England but I don't have scholarship yet.
My question is: In addition to internal scholarships(I mean the university's) What are external scholarships I can apply for? i.e.  If the university doesn't give me a scholarship, are there other British institutions to fund my phd studies or not? I am exploring all my chances in the remaining time to accept the offer.

Jobs.ac.uk has a page about funding a PhD that includes the following:

A number of charitable organisations, foundations and trusts can help fund PhD’s. These include:
The Wellcome Trust
Cancer Research UK
The British Academy
The British Federation of Women Graduates
The Institution of Civil Engineers
Institution of Engineering & Technology
Institution of Mechanical Engineers
Royal Geographical Society
Carnegie Trust for the Universities of Scotland
Leverhulme Trust
Action Medical Research


What to expect from a PHD in Computer Science? (UK) A little background, I'm currently studying a masters in computer science, and I've been wondering about how I should progress my career. I've found myself mostly interested in the research side of Computer Science, and I've been trying to figure out which would be the best steps moving forward.
I've looked into a couple of studentships with some interesting topics out there, but I don't generally see much information on the day-to-day life of a PHD student for this field. I understand each position may be a unique experience but I was wondering if anyone could share any experiences which may help?
Thank you very much in advance, Stay safe.

I don't generally see much information on the day-to-day life of a PHD student

Watch The PhD [Comic] Movies, sure they're make believe, but you can read between the lines


If the status of a paper under review changes, should schools I applied to be notified? I am applying to doctoral programs in the US.

I have a paper currently under review, and, it seems that the status will remain under review after I submit my application packages.

My question is: If my paper is accepted or revised or rejected, then should I notify the schools to which I am applying that this paper was accepted or revised or rejected?

Short answer: no (don't bother).  More nuanced answer: it depends.  Is your paper of earth-shaking significance in some way?  Is it going to appear in some renowned journal (Nature, PNAS, Lancet, Journal of the ACM, etc.)?  If not, it is little more than a waste of time to try to add the information to your application.  Late information is rarely added to application packets (which these days are anyway handled almost entirely online -- convenient in certain ways but makes for an additional hassle when it comes to adding to or correcting an application or supporting documentation).

However, if you have corresponded with some professor you would like to work with at the grad school that you are applying to, and have reason to believe this professor might be interested and able to influence the admissions committee, then I would certainly take the time to send a polite e-mail to this person indicating that your paper was accepted in such-and-such notable journal or conference.  I would however avoid bringing up a rejection, and would also not take the trouble in case of acceptance of a less important article (or one in a less-respectable forum; e.g., an op-ed in your college newspaper).


I am currently in graduate school but need to ask my previous professors for a letter of recommendation. I am worried this will be awkward I just started grad school this semester. But as part of my stipend contract, I am required to continue to apply to scholarships (although I don't need to win them). I have not been in grad school long enough for my advisor to know my work (in fact, we haven't even started on the research yet). So I would have to ask the two professors I previously asked for a LoR last year to write me another one. But I am afraid this will be really awkward since I haven't spoken to them in months and I feel like I'm just asking them to do me favours now. Especially since they are already aware that I am in grad school, and I will just be asking them to write me another letter. How do I phrase this email to them to prevent the awkwardness?

If you explain to them that this is part of your stipend contract that you are required to have these letters to apply to the scholarships, I am 100% sure noting that as well as a quick apology will eliminate any awkwardness.


How should I style my German doctoral title in English documents? I hold a Dr. rer. nat. title from the computer science institute at a German university. I am now writing a job application that I will send to a German organization, but since it has many international employees and the advertisement itself was in English, I decided to write the application in English (assuming that some of the decision makers may not speak German well).
My biggest problem in the translation is my title. In the German original, I use Dr. rumtscho in the CV header and a couple of other places. However, all translated versions I considered have drawbacks:

keep it as Dr. rumtscho. This is idiomatic in German, but I think it's totally strange in English and may make people think that I forgot to pay attention to the header when translating.
Style myself as rumstcho, PhD. While I refer to my title as "PhD" in informal conversation in English, I believe it is officially not permissible to "translate" the title.
Style myself as rumtscho, Dr. rer. nat. This looks weird both in English and in German, and for people unfamiliar with the "there is no traditional doctor title for computer scientists, so we just reuse one" attitude of German universities, they may think I come from a biology or chemistry background.

Which option is likely to be best received? Is the answer different when preparing English-language official documents to be read by Germans and by native English speakers?

Don't overthink it. Both "Dr." and "Dr.rer.nat." would be OK, "PhD" would be inaccurate. The key information is the line in your CV where you point out that you have completed your doctoral degree.
(As relevant context: I am a native German speaker and have experiences in Germany both as a selection committee member and as a successful applicant.)


How significant is it to publish a scientific "review paper" in 6–10 impact factor journal? I have published my thesis to an international conference but it was not anything reputed. However, I do not have access to lab now. I have been asked to be a part of a review-paper writing team and a book-chapter writing team. I am not sure which will have greater impact during my admission in grad school and among researcher community.

This really depends on the field and the venue...
In my own field, book chapters are almost useless for your goals - they come in two flavors: those where already accomplished authors write reviews of a subject and are considered highly but are written by people who do not need an introduction, and those solicited by publishers looking for cheap content they can resell. There are other fields where book chapters are a pretty central part of publishing.
That said, review articles can be basically the same: those where established researchers convey their wisdom are highly respected, but typically the authors have sufficient credit already. In my area, an impact factor of 6-10 is pretty good, though also low for a journal that trades in the review arena: highly influential reviews in review journals get tens to hundreds (sometimes thousands) of citations, so those journals have inflated impact factors.
With the limited information you've provided, I'd assume the review article is better, if indeed the journal is a good journal and not somehow inflating an impact factor with false citations (not an uncommon thing). The more important advice I would offer is for you to check the specific circumstances with an advisor you trust. Your thesis advisor would be a good start.


I've been admitted to multiple PhD programs, how should I choose between them? I've been admitted to more than one PhD program, and I'm having a very hard time making a decision.

The programs I'm accepted to have advantages and disadvantages with respect to one another. How do I weigh the relative importance of difference aspects of the program in order to make an optimal decision?

Ultimately, this is not a decision that anybody else can make for me, because everyone has different values and priorities, and the right decision for me may not be the right decision for somebody else. However, you can help  by giving me more information about how different features of a program will affect my experience in graduate school and my future career.

The offers under consideration differ in a variety of ways:

Ranking
Advisor
Research group
Funding
Other considerations

I need to know more about what kinds of things are important and how these will affect me, so that I can make an informed decision about balancing competing criteria.

Note to readers: These answers quote extensively from other answers on this site (and link to them). If you read something quoted here that you find helpful, please follow the link to the original source and vote it up!

This is a special community wiki 'canonical' question that aggregates advice on a very broad topic - see more information in this meta post.

Each answer here relates to a different metric that one might take under consideration. If you have a new "critical" metric not in the list above that you believe should be an important part of the decision, post a new answer. If you want to add something related a metric that's already represented in its own answer, edit that answer.

Advisor

Your advisor will be a really, really, really key part of your PhD experience, and can make all the difference between success and failure.

There are many different advising styles, and you should learn more about potential advisors to find one whose style works for you.

walkmanyi sums it up:

  Many don't speak about this too often, but with an advisor you are not only choosing a field of interest, but you are choosing a mentor. By all means, you want to "tick well" with him/her. There is not much good for a PhD student having a star researcher advisor whom they see once in a quarter and who is a sociopath on a personal level (this is a bit too extreme, but think about it as a continuum between extremes). Choose somebody with whom you will be able to work, whose example it is worth to follow, from whom you want to learn, not only the scientific stuff, but also workstyle, level of quality he/she strives for, etc. These soft reasons are often more important than anything else.

Fomite has a fairly comprehensive answer on how to judge potential advisors by looking beyond their recent publications:

  There are a few things I would generally look at in a potential advisor beyond just their research/publications:

  Who were the co-authors on their papers? Are they actively collaborating with people in your field - people who could be potentially useful for post-doc posts, etc.? Do their students often show up as primary authors on publications, or are they invariably buried in the middle of a long list of authors?
  Personality. This goes beyond just do you like the person. Do they prefer frequent updates, meetings and the like, or is the occasional check-in enough? Are they a morning person and you prefer working nights, or the other way around? If you send a long email, would it get answered, or do they not often fail to answer emails? I've had some professors who I'm very fond of nevertheless would make poor advisors because of wildly disparate working styles.
  How are their students funded? Your funding stream can have serious impact on your completion time and productivity. If every semester, its a desperate Pick-N-Mix of funded side projects, TAships, etc. you're going to have a lot on your plate that, while potentially an interesting experience, will slow down your progress.
  Where do their students end up? Do they have decent career trajectories? Are they supportive of alternative paths like industry or government?
  Rank and age. A young professor might be more aggressive and eager, on the other hand they're less established, don't necessarily have the same level of institutional support, and if they're not yet tenured, its possible they'll disappear. An older professor may be more established and stable, but might not use "cutting edge" techniques, or feel less of an internal drive to publish.

Henry adds that there may also be some benefits to having an advisor who is generally well-liked by his/her peers:

  I'd add to your list how your advisor is viewed in the rest of the field. Not just on the quality of research (though that's important too), but again, how much people like your advisor personally. Again, a small factor, but having other people in your field like your advisor can make a difference.

But really, the best way to find out about a potential advisor is to talk to their current students, and we have plenty of questions for you to ask!

Piotr Migdal says the most important question to ask is

  Are you happy with your PhD in general?

  It covers a lot of issues, but usually you don't want to do a PhD in a place where students are unhappy and frustrated. The good thing is that if students feel really bad, they rarely hide it.

but he adds a few more, too:

  General contacts on the line student-advisor (How much contact and support can you expect, both for research and administrative stuff?).
  Funding (Is it a problem or a non-issue, e.g. for attending a conference?).
  Research (What the actual research looks like? What is the toughest part, biggest emphasis on, the most time-consuming part, etc?)
  How much time does it typically take to finish PhD? Does it happen often that someone drops out?

Suresh suggests asking:

  does PA [potential advisor] have time to meet with you when you need help ? Or does PA [potential advisor] want too many meetings ?
  how much guidance are you given ? Too much ? Too little ?
  is the relationship "work only" ? Do you talk about non technical academic issues ?

Theresa Liao has some more good questions to ask current students:

  Do/Did you (the current/former PhD) enjoy working in this supervisor's research group?  Do research group members work with each other collaboratively and help each other? And ask the PhD student to elaborate.

  This question tries to get at what the research group dynamic is. This is fairly important in my opinion - the last thing you want to concern yourself with is politics in the research group. I have seen PhD friends frustrated by this.

  Ideally you should ask this question in a less formal setting (some grad school visits will have time for social events). And sometimes you meet grad students who are comfortable sharing their experience openly. If you are not comfortable asking this question, as it can be an awkward question for the supervisor's current PhD, you can simply observe the interaction between group members, and between group members and the supervisor.

  Is the supervisor generally available? Does it take a long time to arrange a meeting to meet with the supervisor (used to be the case with my supervisor because he was so busy)? Does the supervisor respond immediately and effectively (another friend's supervisor tend to leave questions to last minute)?
  Are group members expected to work 24/7 or 9-to-5? Some supervisors expect you to reply to emails immediately, and some work strictly business hours.
  Does the supervisor take a hands-on or hands-off approach? Are students expected to be really independent with lots of freedom, or are they guided/directed along the way with less freedom?
  Does the supervisor support his/her students to consider career paths outside of academia? Some supervisors only want their students to go into academia, and it will be harder to discuss options with such supervisors.

  For Q2-Q5, the right answer will depend on your own preference - what you want is a supervisor whom you will work well with.


Expletives in academic writing for coursework? I was just wondering if I should include an edited expletive in an essay I have to write for a Software Development class. I'm currently writing a paper about debugging techniques and I wanted to talk about reading documentation to ensure the correct use of libraries and algorithms. This is commonly referred to as RTFM or "Read The Fucking Manual". So I was wondering if I should change it to "Read The [expletive] Manual", replace a couple letters with *'s, or scrap the idea entirely.

I just thought the teacher may enjoy a break from reading the same essay over 50 times that will include the exact same content (there are only so many debugging techniques).

I'm also thinking about including the "It's not a bug, it's a feature" with the following image while expanding on the line of thinking.

The reason why I think I can get away with this is because the teacher frequently cracks jokes during his lecture, and he has actually used the bug vs feature joke in class before.

I was wondering if I should change it to "Read The [expletive] Manual", replace a couple letters with *'s, or scrap the idea entirely.

I'll opt for "scrap the idea entirely". You are misinterpreting what the purpose of class essays is - this isn't supposed to be a witty, innovative text that entertains the lecturer, and the lecturer will likely not mind so much reading about the same debugging techniques over and over again. The purpose of this text is to explain what you know about said debugging techniques. A secondary purpose is that you show that you know how to write an academic text. Some semi-witty text is likely to fail the second test, and spending a lot of paper space on an unrelated joke is likely to at least be a bad indicator for the first test (that is, if I get a paper where the author spends a lot of time writing about semi-related nonsense, my initial impression is that the author didn't really know what to write about the actual topic).

  The reason why I think I can get away with this is because the teacher frequently cracks jokes during his lecture

There's a place and a time to be humorous. Presentations and lectures can be a good time (because, if well done, jokes break the ice and keep the audience's attention), academic papers are notoriously a very bad time to crack jokes. That the lecturer cracks jokes in class does not necessarily mean that he wants to see them in your manuscript. I tend to crack the occasional bad joke in class, and as you may be able to tell, I am no fan of humour in student assignments.

  and he has actually used the bug vs feature joke in class before.

So he won't even laugh because he already knows the joke :) at least come up with something new.


How to present ongoing dissertation research and get feedback on a one-on-one basis? I am in the social sciences (political science) doing research largely based on fieldwork. Accordingly, my dissertation project has changed quite a bit in the four months since getting my prospectus approved and beginning fieldwork. My department is fairly open, with helpful faculty, and I want to reach out to many different professors to get feedback. I check in with my advisors every few weeks with a just brief email, which is sufficient for them because they understand the broader project.

How can I present ongoing evolving research to new people, especially faculty members? For instance, I could write a brief two-page memo summarizing my dissertation project and revise it on a monthly basis. The only drawback here is that this might require writing a new two-pager every month. From writing fellowship proposals, I know this actually takes a lot of work.

What techniques did you find effective for getting for advice from people outside your dissertation committee during your dissertation work?

People have a lot to read in academia as is. Sending out a document and asking for feedback is a strenuous exercise for all involved parties. You may want to take into consideration that some of your colleagues will also simply not want to willingly participate with their opinion.

Instead, a useful compromise is the use of a presentation. Prepare one whenever you see fit and advertise to your faculty by email what it is you're presenting, why you're presenting, and explain that you're specifically looking for feedback on 'X'; 'X' being the methodology applied, noticeable gaps in literature, etc.

In this manner, you practice your presentation skills, you take only 10 minutes or so of your colleagues' time, you strengthen relationships amongst your peers, and you're immediately available for questions. The benefits of this approach are many, and I think you'll be able to find even more than the ones I've just listed.

I hope that this was helpful to you.


Article got accepted into PRL -- do I pay the costs? Last week we got an article accepted into PRL (Physical Review Letters). As is standard, they afterwards sent out an email saying

  To help defray editorial and production expenses, APS, a
  not-for-profit, society publisher, expects authors of manuscripts to
  pay appropriate publication charges; publication charges are
  contributions from authors' institutions to the cost of disseminating
  research results and should be regarded as an essential and proper
  part of their research budget.  You are requested to make a payment of
  $765 toward the cost of disseminating your research results.  However,
  the inability to pay this charge will not affect the publication
  process of your manuscript.

So they say they expect us to pay, but at the same time they say the publication process continues independently of whether this happens.

What is the 'proper'/'sensible' thing to do? What is commonly done?

What are your options? You can pay or delete the email.

If you pay, your group will have $765 less. That's the only difference in outcomes. These charges are completely voluntary and have no effect on anything if you choose not to pay. In my experience, you'll never hear about this again. You will not have to justify your decision.

What do most people do? From my observations, the majority of groups simply don't pay voluntary charges, regardless of available funds.

What should you do? This is a matter of opinion. You (or the PI with the money) should decide whether APS deserves a $765 donation for the purposes they state, or whether it can be put to better use at your institution.


Fair use amount in short journal articles? When it comes to how much one is allowed to copy from a book or a journal article, I often read about it as being 10% of the total pages number or a whole complete chapter (whichever is higher). However, how can one apply this rule if, for example, the journal article is only 10 pages? Copying just 1 page is often pointless as, unless one is quoting a definition or something, it's often not enough to convey a point or to highlight some ideas. Any insight?

Fair use is a concept that is defined in quite a fuzzy manner, at least in the US, and there is no defined "safe" amount.

The key question is why you want to copy so much from somebody else's work, and for what purpose---i.e., how it relates to the other elements of the "fair use" test.  If you are copying into a scientific article that you are writing, then even a fairly short amount is likely to be quite high and hard to justify, whereas if you are making a handout for discussion in a small class you might be able to reasonably use the full work.


When and why did conferences pick up the habit of giving out conference bags to attendees? I wonder when and why conferences picked up the habit of giving out conference bags to attendees.

For the why part: One reason is to make registration at the conference as smooth as possible. Imagine the first morning of a conference and all the attendees at the registration desk lining up and for each and every participant the guy at the desk hands over the program, the book of abstracts, the badge, the ticket for the conference dinner, the ticket for the prebooked tour (if there is any), the receipt of attendance, the receipt of payment, the complimentary notebook and pen and, of course, the stuff from sponsors. Takes much longer than pre-packed bags. (And even with all things pre-packed, there are always queues during the rush hour.

As for the when part, I have no idea. But if you have ever sat at  a conference desk you'll agree that it must have been no later than the first time one guy organized a conference with more than 100 people for the second time.


Should I focus on my grades or on finishing my degree on time? I am doing an 5-year Integrated Master's degree (3-year Bachelor + 2-year Master) on Physics in Europe. Aiming for a thesis in Quantum Computation/Information. I am currently on the 4th year and have a "good" overall grade (84%).

However, due to health issues, I failed to perform well on my 6th semester (the last of the Bachelor), almost failing half of the courses. I got 50%-60% on 4 of them.

  So I am faced with a dilemma:

  Should I focus on finishing my degree on time, potentially having to either manage doing a thesis and improving some grades at the same time, or settle for those low grades and just move on?

  OR

  Should I focus on improving my grades and achieving the ones I know I am capable of, potentially getting to ~88%, with the
  disadvantage of having to delay/prolong my thesis to a 11th semester?

This might be a very close call and depend on a lot of factors, but I am interested in knowing, in general, which option gives me the highest chance of success in continuing my academic career with a PhD.

Not sure if a Postdoc would follow after, but I eventually want to go for a top-tier job in industry, either related or not to research (like IBM's or Google's Quantum Lab, or some other not focusing on research).

Usually there is a scheduled time and an expected number of credits for a degree. A BSc normally takes 4 years, with a given number of classes. This is because the ability to absorb the material in the allotted time is part of the evaluation of the student.

Ordinarily that is. But you mention health issues.

If you had some major life altering illness then it is something you should discuss with the university. I mean something like as serious as pneumonia. I had pneumonia a couple years ago. If it had happened in university it would certainly have cost me a term, maybe a full year.

Under such circumstances, and presuming you now have some kind of control of the situation, you should consider repeating either a term or a year, depending.

First talk to your favorite prof or your department chair. Ask if there is the possibility of repeating the year. Or possibly repeating only some of the classes. In most cases, they will want to help you. It looks good for them for you to perform well in the university. They will nearly always want to help you finish the degree.

Be open to their suggestions. They may have suggestions of alternatives.


Speech disabilites for PhD admission for international applicants One of my Iranian friends wants to apply for a PhD program in computer science to a US university. He can't speak fluently even in our native language at all, but in the other side he has a relatively strong background:

Good GPA in both MSc. and BSc. (> 18 out of 20)
First rank in BSc.
Graduated from most prominent university in Iran (Sharif Univ. of Tech.)

Question: is there any chance for his application to be approved and for him to get funded?

Note that my question is a little general. I'm not considering a particular university. What I am looking for is how much is it possible for a PhD student to not participate in presentations, lectures, team works, typically all works in which he should speak.

In the other hand, I've listed below what he can do perfectly.

Teacher assistant for lower level students (designing exams, assignments, marking exams/quizzes papers, but not presenting at classroom)
Review scholarly articles/papers
Generally all regular jobs that a normal PhD student can do (excluding speech presentations and such assignments)

Provided he is fluent in written English, I cannot see how his application could legitimately (or legally) be discriminated against. If he can listen to a spoken conversation without problems, that will hugely decrease the concessions needed to accommodate his disability.

Provided he can listen to spoken English without a problem, I do not see why even giving presentations is an unreasonable expectation either. Why not do so in the style of Stephen Hawking, setting to the presentation slides a pre-prepared monologue that is read out by a speech synthesizer? If he is a reasonably fast typist, responding to questions should not be a significant problem either.

This style of communication could even be extended to taking tutorial classes, networking at conferences, etc. Sure, it's a bit awkward and people may take a little while to adjust. But it certainly seems doable.

Perhaps this is relevant reading: Is it possible for people with a stutter to have a career in academia?


List of 2013 US National Merit Scholars I am doing research that requires me to find a list of how many US National Merit Scholars were enrolled at each university for 2013.

I can find the 2014 list in the Annual Report the National Merit Society has on the website and I can find data pre-2013 at the Center for Measuring University Performance (at ASU). However neither an online search, the National Merit Society website, nor my university's online catalog were able to locate the Annual Report for 2013. I know this information must be out there (since the Annual Report for 2014 is a downloadable pdf), but is not easy to find. Does anybody know of a list (preferably online) of how many 2013 National Merit Scholars attended each university?

Using Google-Fu, I believe I have found what you are looking for:

The 2012-2013 Annual Report

As a guide, someone somewhere will always want to archive something. In this case, archive.org didn't have it, but the owner of that domain, who is likely to be an awesome person in research in a few years, cached a copy of it for us.

The statement used to find this document was:

"2012-13" national merit scholar annual report pdf

It is important to use the years in quotes as 2013 can be used to find the current report as well.


Is it better to cite a PhD thesis or an article under review? A collaborator of mine has finished and defended his phd thesis, he has also submitted one chapter of the thesis as an article, and now this article is under review.

I am submitting an article and I want to cite this work, which one of the two should I cite? And if I cite the article should I use "Smith et. al, in review unpublished or pers. communication"

I was thinking that even though not peer-reviewed, a thesis might be better than something under review.

Do you know if his article will be accepted? Would you know so soon enough? If there is a chance that it will be rejected (there always is but you may have a feeling of the quality of his article) I'd cite his thesis.

In any other case I'd cite his peer-reviewed article with Smith et al., under review or Smith et al., submitted to (name of journal). Papers are usually more accessible and perceived to be of higher quality than theses and it would also give him one citation on his article already.

Or, as Pont pointed out, cite both: Statement in your paper (Smith 2016 [this would be the thesis], Smith et al., under review [this would be the pending article]).


In Google Scholar, is it possible to view the list of papers cited by a specific paper? For any paper on Google Scholar, you can click "Cited by ..." to see a list of subsequent papers that cite the original paper.

However, is it possible to see a list of papers that the original paper cites? I realize that one can simply view the paper itself for the list of references, but I would like a way to see it as a list of links in Google Scholar, similar to the "Cited by ..." list.

As you mentioned, unfortunately, Google Scholar only provides the list of publications that cite a given reference.

However, if you have access to Web of Science, to look up a list of references cited in a given publication, you can use the Cited References tool.

Note that some journals are not indexed by Web of Science, so having several tools to do the job may be the best way to approach this; e.g., in addition to Web of Science, you could also use Research Gate as mentioned in the other answer. For those journals that are indexed by Web of Science, I find the Cited References tool to be very useful.


Contacting authors directly when reviewing a paper I am reviewing a paper for a journal that has an open review policy. This means that when a paper is submitted to the journal, the paper is published online on the journal's website and when a decision is made, the reviews are published with the reviewers' names. If they want, reviewers can opt out and be anonymous.

I reviewed a paper where I was not anonymous. The decision was to request a major revision. I was invited to review a new version of the paper. I am still unsatisfied with some aspects of the paper but I do not think the problematic parts are sufficient to request a reject. However, I am reluctant to accept the paper with minor revision because I think the changes are substantial enough to require another round of review for checking the last version. If I could, I would propose another major revision, but the journal policy is that a major revision is either accepted (possibly with minor revision) or rejected.

So I thought I could contact the authors (whom I know) directly to tell them how to fix the issues, and then request a minor revision. Since they already know that I am a reviewer, this seems like it would not break any principles of good reviewing behaviour, would it?

Independantly of my precise case, and in order to make the answers useful to more people, it would be good to see opinions on what circumstances allow a reviewer to contact authors personally.

[BTW, I already asked the journal editors if this would be appropriate. At the time of writing the question, I'm waiting for their reply.]

Edit after journal editor answered my request:

The editor in chief replied by discouraging me from contacting the authors and provide suggestion how to deal with the situation within my review. There were several reasons evoked for not contacting the authors, but I will simply tell the one that I find most important: that it prevents documenting the review process properly. As a journal that prides itself of making open reviews, contacting the authors directly completely breaks transparency.

Unless the editor gives you permission, I think it would be improper to deal with the authors directly. While it might speed things along a bit, it would also cut the editor and his/her staff out of the conversation.

It is better to just write your report to the editor and submit it in the usual way. This establishes a record of the revisions.

It also avoids a situation in which a reviewer would think that his/her comments were important enough to warrant co-authorship. That might not be your position, but some might want to consider it if the option were open.

Don't feel bad about the authors. The paper must eventually stand on its own, independent of any relationship between reviewers and authors. You are doing them a favor by being honest and having the editor in the loop aids that.

But the editor may have different views, in which case, you can follow them. You have done the right thing by asking.


I am an editor for a lousy paper and I found a better algorithm than theirs. Must I share it with them? I am handling a paper as an associate editor that proposed an algorithm that I find to be weak.  In fact, I was able to show that a very simple, brute-force approach actually has a better running time than their algorithm.  Therefore, I will recommend rejecting this paper.  Do I have an obligation to share my proof that the brute-force running time is better?  I want the higher-level editors to have confidence in the rejection, but it also occurs to me that I might be able to improve my own result and publish it independently.  Is this a violation of ethics?

UPDATE:  Well this certainly took off!  I would like to add the following:

The overwhelming consensus is that it would be unethical for me to "scoop" the other authors, so I will not do that. The advice from all is greatly appreciated.
The journal is the top in its field, so we have to be extremely selective. The problem proposed is fairly interesting, but overall the paper does not meet our threshold.
When I say that brute force is better than their method, I mean it in a provable, big O sense.
The authors' proposed scheme is not only inefficient, it is written in a very confusing way. In fact, I asked them to compare their approach to brute-force as a way of helping them clarify their argument, and they did a bad job of it, which is what led me to look into it in the first place.
The fact that brute force performs better than their scheme is not totally trivial because it relies on a combinatorial argument that is not amazing, but not completely obvious either.
I will share my proof with the Editor in chief, but I have decided not to give it to the authors; I will consider publishing independently in the future if their work ever appears elsewhere.
Their paper is not on arXiv or any other website.

I think you are treading on thin ice, ethically speaking. Obviously you, as an editor, have no obligation to help the authors in any specific way, and you are free to tell them about your improvement or not, but rejecting their paper, taking the idea/problem, applying a different method to its resolution, and then publishing this under your own name seems problematic.

As an editor, you are usually expected to treat the papers you are handling as privileged information, and you are specifically expected to not use your knowledge of rejected papers to scoop the authors - which is exactly what you plan to do. Say you reject the paper with comments along the line "important problem, solution is too simplistic". The authors now go back to the drawing board, come up with a solution similar to what you had in mind, and get their paper accepted. If you publish your idea first they obviously can't do this anymore - you have effectively made use of knowledge you learned as an editor to pull the rug from under the people who initially thought of the research project, even if they did not do a great job with the first submission.

I understand that it sucks that if you told them about your idea you would be giving away information that, in different circumstances, may be sufficient for co-authorship. However, I would argue, as a reviewer / editor we sign up for helping the authors "for free" to some extent (that is, without expecting recognition).

If you really don't want to tell the authors about your idea your best hope is that the authors get their work accepted somewhere else. In that case you are free to write your follow-up paper and cite the original paper.


Is there a standard mapping between "English" and "Latin" honors? I know of (at least) two sets of phrases used to indicate a degree awarded with honors:

English: With distinction / High distinction / Highest distinction
Latin: Cum laude / Magna cum laude / Summa cum laude

These phrases are almost literal translations of each other, but can they be treated as exactly equivalent for academic purposes?  Or are there subtle distinctions (no pun intended)?

Suppose an academic received a degree with honors from a school that used one system, and is asked to fill in a form which uses the other system.  Should they try to translate, or leave blank as inapplicable?

(I realize there are no universal standards dictating on what criteria such honors should be based, so there is not a lot of meaning conveyed by these phrases anyhow.  But the academic does not want to be accused of misrepresenting their credentials.)

In general, it's always best to report things as they were received. If you received "highest distinction," right that, not summa cum laude. Let the institution receiving the application handle the translation, unless they explicitly tell you otherwise.


Consequences of quiting a masters program (because of a job) and later applying for PhD program Suppose a student complete 1 year of a masters degree (2 year program). She then decides to accept a job. Later on, she wants to apply to a PhD program. Would it look bad if she didn't finish the masters program?

No, I do not think it would be a problem provided you work in a field close to your PhD area. If you get relevant experience, it helps to get into PhD.

Many university (at least in US) allow direct PhD admission for qualified BS students. So, if you are able to do some good work in your job, it can help you in applying for a PhD.

The reason I am emphasizing "relevant experience" since otherwise you may have to justify quitting the Masters program. The admission managers/professors may tend to suspect your staying for PhD.


What is expected in a Thesis Abstract, on a math job application? I'll be finishing my PhD in May, so I'm applying for jobs. I have my application materials prepared and have been sending them out. Occasionally an application demands something I don't already have prepared, leaving me to decide if it's worth creating that extra item to apply for that job.

As far as I can tell, a thesis abstract is basically like the introductory portion of the research statement, which I already have prepared. If I was asked for a thesis abstract instead of a research statement, I would chop down the latter to create the former.

The problem is, there is a job I'm very interested in that asks for both. I'm not sure how to interpret this. What are they expecting?

The few times I was asked for such a thing, I literally copy-pasted the abstract for my thesis into a document and submitted it. mathjobs doesn't want to tell me which jobs asked for it back when I applied so I'm not sure (I got two postdoc offers that round but I'm pretty sure those places didn't ask for a thesis abstract). No one emailed me to tell me that I'd done it wrong though. Usually there is a contact person listed in each mathjobs ad that you could contact to ask for details, but if say the deadline is tonight I would recommend just copy-pasting the thesis abstract, or making up a thesis abstract if your thesis doesn't exist yet.

In principle though, the introduction to your research statement and your thesis abstract can be (but isn't always) quite distinct (my thesis was a subset of my research statement). A research statement should have at least something to say about where you envision your research going, but a thesis abstract is mostly limited to the contents of your thesis.


How should I reference a repository of data and resources created to accompany my publication? I'm writing a research paper and there's a large amount of code and data related to the study which may be of use to those who would read the study. They can confirm the correctness of the techniques, modify it for their own purposes, perform new analysis on the data, etc.

All these relevant files exist in a public repo, but I'm uncertain what's the best way to reference these. Would it be a citation? Just drop the URL directly into the paper? Other ideas?

Short Recommendation: Include the URL in-text followed by a full citation and end of text reference. If using someone else's repository, do the same, and probably also include a citation to the accompanying paper, unless the authors request otherwise. Place this citation in a prominent position in the method. If the open repository is a big part of the contribution of the paper, consider also including the URL in the abstract.
Longer Answer
Researchers in my field of psychology are starting to use the Open Science Framework as a repository for archiving data, code, and other materials. These repositories include a short URL that is meant to be stable (e.g., https://osf.io/5krfq/ ).
When referencing these repositories, I have read papers that just include the URL, and others that include a full citation. For example, the full citation for the above using APA style might be:

Wynton, S. K. A., & Anglim, J. (2017). Abrupt Strategy
Change Underlies Gradual Performance Change: Bayesian Hierarchical
Models of Component and Aggregate Strategy Use. Retrieved from
https://osf.io/5krfq

So in summary, I don't think the standards for data and repository citation have been formalised sufficiently yet.
I think there are a few considerations:

If there are any questions about the stability of the repository URL, then you need to provide more information. For example, if the repository is hosted on a standard university website, then it is quite likely that the URL might change over time. Even in the case of something like the OSF, it might still be safer to include additional information. References work well because there is redundancy.
In general, providing a URL in the main text makes it easier for the reader to see that the repository is readily accessible.
In many performance evaluation systems, citations of papers are counted, whereas citations of other resources may not be. This may be changing, but it is worth thinking about.

Referencing existing repositories by other authors
If you are referencing an existing repository that other authors created, then you should look to see what requests these authors made. For example, they may want you to cite a particular paper that is linked to the repository. More generally, there is a arguably an ethical and professional obligation to acknowledge those providing the repository by using a full citation.
Referencing your own repository that accompanies a paper
If you are creating your own repository that is linked to the paper you are writing, I quite like the idea of including the  URL in text as well as the end of text reference. E.g.,

Data and code is available at https://osf.io/5krfq (Wynton & Anglim, 2017).

And then you include the end of text reference as above.
This has the benefit of making the URL very clear to the reader (e.g., encourages the reader to click the link) but it also has the benefits of full citations (e.g., the reference is more robust, creates a practice of citing data and code as equal to citing papers).
Note about blind review: If you are submitting your manuscript to a place that does blind review, you need to do another step during the review process to prevent disclosure of author identities. One approach is to put a black mark over the author names in the in-text citation and end-of-text reference. OSF also has the benefit that you can create a custom-URL that provides a read-only view of the repository with author names removed. When such a feature is not provided by your repository service, you might need to instead attach anonymised versions of the materials and black out the link.
Where to put this citation/reference? There is another issue of where to put this reference. E.g., Abstract, author note, first sentence of the method, some other section of the method, etc. There are several considerations:

More people will see it if you put it in the abstract. The author note is another relatively prominent location. Thus, if you see the repository as fundamental to the contribution of your paper, then you may want to include the url in your abstract, and then include the full citation somewhere in the method.
Some journals have conventions regarding this. e.g., some journals have badges for open data or open materials, some journals ask for a section in the method with a label like "Open Practices". If so, then it makes sense to follow these conventions.
If you want to draw some attention to your open data and materials (but putting the url in the abstract feels excessive), then I think the first sentence of the method possibly under a section heading like "Open Practices" is a good option. Thus, it will be clear to any reader that gets to the method that these materials are available.
If you think the repository is not that important, then it could be placed in whatever section seems most content relevant (e.g., end of the participants/data description section or somewhere in the section discussing the data analytic approach).

Personally, I like the idea of "Open Practices" (or something similar) becoming a  standardized section in manuscripts where the authors explain what materials have been made open or are made to justify why they are not open.
What name to give to repository reference: Another issue, which I have not yet resolved, is what is the best title for repositories that accompany a paper. Possible titles:

Identical title as accompanying paper
Related title to accompanying paper: e.g., "Data and code for [insert paper title here]" or "Supplementary materials for [insert paper here]"
Something very descriptive: e.g., "Data and code examining ..."

If you use the identical title as the accompanying paper, this creates the potential for ambiguity when people cite the paper or the repository. However, it might make it easier for people to find. And if getting citations to your original paper rather than the repository is particularly important, then it may be the case that citations to the repository will get counted towards the paper depending on how the citation engine (e.g., Google Scholar, Scopus, etc.) matches articles. Such repositories can also often host a pre-print of the article. In that sense the repository becomes almost a landing page for the actual publication that is not behind a publisher's paywall.
From a descriptive perspective, I think that something like "Data and code for [insert title]" seems better. It makes the link with the accompanying paper very clear, but also makes it clear that it is a distinct academic artefact.


What is the highest post-doctoral salary one should ask for (immunology) I know the average salary is generally 45K USD for science post-docs. However, I received an email from a team of researchers who I had an excellent interview with and basically asked, "How much do you want?"

I have no idea what is the maximum amount of money I should ask for without being insulting. I'll be honest, although I don't do science for the money, this would definitely help make a decision for this particular posting.

Postdoc salaries as high as 60K are not unheard of, especially if the cost of living is high and/or you have children. I believe some very competitive "independent postdoc" positions can even reach as high as 70K. However, these salaries may not increase annually, while typically lower salaries do increase annually.

BTW I believe the average 1st year postdoc salary is under 40K (and so is the NIH postdoc salary guideline).


In May, my professor agreed to write me letter of recommendation, but now I just graduated I just graduated recently in May, and right before graduation, I asked if my professors could write me LOR for grad school. And they all agreed. Now I'm in the process of applying to grad schools, but it's almost October, and how should I write the email to remind my professors of LOR? Should I start by asking if their offers still stand, and if they need anything else (like supporting materials) from me?

Be friendly, normal, polite, and human and remember that your professors are (or at least should be) too.
If they offered to write the LORs, they want to help you out. It makes people feel good to help others especially with LORs, because you get to help someone and feel nice and authoritative.
I wouldn't even bother asking if the offer still stands. Just make sure that you tell them that you're grateful and appreciative that they made the offer, let them know if there are any deadlines that you have coming up which make the need for LORs more urgent, and you should be just fine.
Always offer supplemental documentation if they need it.


Addressing Professor in email with half-typed name, how to deal with the mistake? You address a new Professor by accident with half-typed name in an email. The professor is from US but working now as a professor in Europe. This was my mistake. Rest of the mail was done except half of the name -- the name had unique alphabets not finding in my keyboard so he may have similar experiences. Anyway my mistake can make me look very ignorant the expression I don't want to create.

How should you deal with the issue? With apologies email? Just forgetting the mistake and in the next email making 100% sure to have correct spelling?

Forget about the mistake. If you want you can apologise in the next email. First names are more than enough for most academics unless you are culturally inclined to be very formal with a professor of the same back ground.


Can I slightly change the title of my conference presentation? I'm going to a conference in December and I will have a 20 minute talk there. Originally, a colleague of mine was supposed to go, but personal circumstances resulted in my taking part instead. My colleague and I cover the same area, so this is not the problem. But since my colleague handed in the title of the talk we have reevaluated our use of field-specific key words. Therefore, I think the title as it stands is a little misleading. Is it common practice to adapt conference presentation titles? I found one topic covering a similar matter, but it hasn't got much attention.

Given that, officially at least, the title of your talk will still be the old misleading one, I'm not sure how much there really is to be gained by changing the wording of your first slide, which seems to be effectively what you're thinking of doing. In fact, having a title for your talk that doesn't match what's in the programme could be potentially misleading anyway (for example, if the chair reads your title from the programme, rather than the slide, or if the title on the screen isn't what your audience had expected).

If you feel that your title is misleading then what I think I would do would be to begin the talk by making it clear that the title is potentially misleading, and then clarifying what the talk is actually about. You could even, before the audience's eyes, swap your old title for a new title.

As long as the programme has the old title then to a certain extent the damage is done. I think the best approach to take is simply to make clear from the outset that the title is misleading, and explain what you're really going to talk about.


Can I ask a non-academic for an academic letter of recommendation? A scholarship based on existing mental health problems and conviction to finishing/doing well in school and it requests 2 reference letters and doesn't specify from whom. I'm only a second year in my undergrad, and all of my classes are too big for a connection with a professor. There is no one academic to write me one.

My mom suggested this one family friend who is a nurse and who has known me for 14 years. Is this a good idea? Any ideas who could write the second one?

The purpose of such letters is to get some assurance from "trusted" commentators who can attest to the likelihood of your success in the program. While for most academic letters, professors and teachers are best, in this case it may be different. I can't suggest who would be best, but keep the two elements in mind:

People who can be immediately trusted to give an honest assessment, and people who can judge your likelihood of success.


Is it unethical to have a possible future coauthor to review my current paper? Many think it is unethical to have your coauthor to review the paper; many think it is not.

In my situation, I am discussing possible collaboration opportunities with researcher A. He knows the field well and might be the fittest referee for my current paper, which is also in this field.

Is it unethical to nominate him as a reviewer?

Many think it is unethical to have your coauthor to review the paper; many think it is not.

Many journals and associations have strict guidelines on this matter; I suggest you to take a look at the answers to Conflict of interest as a referee, especially @DavidRicherby's one, and possibly also to other questions with the tag conflict-of-interest. In any case, a recent co-author, in my opinion, is a big no.

In my situation, I am discussing possible collaboration opportunities with researcher A. He knows the field well and might be the fittest referee for my current paper, which is also in this field.
Is it unethical to nominate him as a reviewer?

I assume these are serious discussions and not just a generic exchange of niceties "this is interesting, we should discuss it some time" at a conference. In this case, I suggest nominating him, but mentioning the possible conflict of interest at the same time. There is no harm in being explicit about it; just let the editor know and decide for themselves. If you have only a tiny text box to nominate possible referees, you can argue more in the cover letter.


Will I be considered as a very rude person if I call my teacher to check an urgent email I got three recommendation letters from three of my former school teachers (professors A, B, C).
On 20th Jan, I got an email from the graduate school that I had applied to. In the email, they told me that they had received the confirmations from professors A and B, but are still waiting for the confirmation from professor C.
My application will be considered as successful on condition that they have received the confrimation from professor C before 30th
I have sent at least ten emails to professor c for the past few days, but not seen any replies from him.
I have got the phone number, fax number, and address of his office in my former school. Since my former school is a few hours by bus away from my house, and I can not reach him by emails, I am thinking to call him directly on his office phone number, but I am wondering if it will make him very angry or I may be getting scolded by him.
What shall I do?

I think you have made a mistake sending him so many E-mails.
Nevertheless, its always okay to call someone and ask something politely (If the prof. C is sane you should be okay).


Editing example written work for PhD opportunity? For an interview for a PhD, I have been asked to provide 'an example of some written work from a project I have worked on in the past'. I'm assuming this is generally intended to be previous coursework I have completed for my undergraduate degree. Should I send an example of my work as it was when I submitted it for marking, or make changes to it so that it is further improved/more appropriate for the role?

Send the best document you can.  It does not matter if it was marked in the past or not.  It does not matter when you wrote it or when you edited it.
You can ask a faculty member from your previous degree for detailed advice.


Is it a good idea to name some mathematical objects after my thesis advisor? I am doing my Ph.D. thesis in mathematics. I am wondering if it is a good idea to name some mathematical objects after my thesis advisor. The two objects I have in my mind are:

A representation, whose existence and faithfulness is a main result of my thesis. This representation has not be studied before and thus unnamed.
A collection of subgroups of a certain group, which have been studied by others but with no specific name assigned to those subgroups.

I did not ask this question directly to my thesis advisor since I believe that out of humility he would decline this request. Have asked this question to a mathematics professor from another university, who personally knows my advisor well and he says that it was a very good idea. But he was somewhat drunk when answering my question and I am wondering if I should take his answer seriously.

Edit: The representation I have mentioned is similar but different from a classical representation, which is named after the mathematician Emil Artin. In this case, should I still call it "Artin's representation", or "(my advisor's surname)'s representation", or leave it unnamed?

It sound as though your advisor was not the first to study/define/use these objects, but rather you just want to name them something, and think it might be nice to name them in honor of your advisor.  Please don't do this.  You'll only contribute to Stigler's law of eponymy, confuse people, embarrass your advisor and/or offend whoever was the first to study these objects.

Bear in mind two things: (i) Not every random object deserves a special name.  (ii) When you name objects, name them in a descriptive and evocative way, that will make using the terms intuitive and non-confusing (as a corollary, it also shouldn't conflict with other notation).  Many people don't even like the idea of name any mathematical objects after people, though it's common practice.

Now that naming them after your advisor is out of the way, you should feel free to consult your advisor on naming these things.


Is experience as a Lecturer in Europe/UK considered relevant in Indian inst. (IIT/IIIT/NIT) for Assistant Professor positions in CS? Is a Lecturer in the UK or Europe considered pretty much the same as an Assistant Professor in the US, considering the fact that this Lecturer position involves teaching, research and service?

Do Indian institutions (IIT/IIIT/NIT) consider the experience as a Lecturer in Europe or the UK equivalent to the US for Assistant Professor positions in CS?

In the UK, a Lecturer position is approximately equivalent to an Assistant Professor position in the US, with the exception that in the UK it is usually a permanent position, while an assistant professor in the US needs to get a tenure before becoming a permanent faculty. (On the other hand, the UK system doesn't have tenure at all.)

The 2nd paragraph of the OP is unclear.


What reference from current insitution is required/advisable for pre-tenure move? I am interviewing for a tenure-track position in the United States. I am currently a tenure-track faculty member at another US university. In my cover letter, I stated that I wished to keep my search confidential, at least until the flyout stage. Now that I am at the interview/flyout stage, I am trying to figure out a strategy for providing a contact/reference from my current department without damaging my relationships if I stay in my current position. I already have three official letters of reference from faculty at other institutions.

What sort of communication between a prospective department and a current department is typical/expected at this stage? Could it be limited to calling a junior faculty member for a discussion? What sort of contacts should I prepared to offer or what sort of statements should I be prepared to make? (I realize one option is just to ask the prospective department, but that is a conversation I would like to be prepared for before opening.)

Some relevant details:

My current department is small. There are just a few tenured faculty, most of whom are quite close to the chair. (or who I don't know well because they have been on sabbatical/other reasons.) If I ask a tenured faculty member to give me a reference, the chair would likely know.
I have been told that my chair "holds a grudge." I could see this being true.
I do have a junior faculty member in my department who I have revealed my search to (they are also quietly searching). I think this person would speak well on my behalf. This person is not in my direct specialty.
I believe I have a good reputation in my current department.
My other major mentors at the university are in the administration for my department. I don't think these people hold grudges, but I am not convinced they have an incentive to keep my search confidential.
I applied because the new department is in a city where my family lives, it is also higher-ranking than my current department. I am early pre-tenure but I could not afford to pass up this opportunity.

This question is related: Should I request a letter of recommendation from current employers that don't want me to leave?
However, my situation is different as I have a current position and more of an incentive to keep the search private. I also have some indication that my current chair may not be pleased by this.

I don't think any contact with your current department is expected. Generally you are only expected to provide references who will write letters on your behalf, and it's not required that any of them be from your current department. Academic circles are small, and somebody in your department may find out anyway. Hopefully their reaction will be to incentivize you to stay.

When I have been on hiring committees, we never sought a contact within the current department. If you are shortlisted, then the committee thinks you're pretty amazing, so why would they suspect you are being forced out? My experience is with heavily research-focused departments; this might be different, say, at a small liberal arts school.


Can low score in GRE hurt the application with good GPA for top graduate school in US I wonder can poor general GRE exam hurt an application with very strong GPA (about 3.9) and good letter of recommendations for getting an admission to top graduate schools in US? meaning that How strong is effect of GRE ?can you be rejected based on your GRE result?

I am not in engineering, but chemistry, and I suspect the answer is very similar.

I won't lie. This will definitely hurt your chances, depending on how low your score is.

For one, many programs have minimum GRE scores for acceptance - that may or may not be advertised. There are so many highly qualified applicants to top schools that the admissions committee have to do something to cut back the pile. While there are advantages and disadvantages to the GRE, it is standardized and using a score level as a filter is helpful to the committee. (Usually this "first cut" is a GRE score well below the average admitted score. We know that some students don't test well, so we'd prefer to look at the whole package.)

Beyond "your score is too low," let's assume you make the first cut. At that point, the GRE matters less, since the committee will read your recommendation letters, look at your transcript etc.

Even then, the GRE matters some. If we're considering a student coming from a school that we don't know, we simply cannot calibrate the GPA and/or the recommendation letters. So the GRE gives us some information on what a 3.9 GPA "means" relative to another student at a school that we know.

Finally, the GRE is a piece of information to the admissions committee. One key thing it tells us is how seriously you took the exam and whether you prepared for it. We know that the GRE is a self-selecting bunch. You only take the exam if you're considering applying to graduate programs. So if someone gets a very low score.. well, that's not a good sign. What do we learn about how serious a student will be in grad school?

All that said, I have talked over the years with colleagues in other departments and other schools. There isn't a huge correlation between GRE scores and success in graduate school. There just isn't really anything better either.


How to tell whether invitation to special issue of a journal is worth being accepted? I have been invited to participate to a special issue of Entropy for some work that I have done in statistical physics.

I received from other journals many such invitations which looked like spam,  and I wonder whether I should take this one more seriously, or consider it somehow a good one.

What are the criteria to tell whether the special issue is 'prestigious' enough, besides Impact Factor and names of guest editors?

First things first, Entropy is an MDPI journal. MDPI is a rather controversial publisher - see the "Controversies section of its Wikipedia page - and while I make no judgment on whether it's a predatory publisher, it's preferable to know the facts so you can make an educated decision on whether to publish with them.

If you conclude that it's worth publishing with them, then factors to consider are:

Do you have anything relevant to contribute to the special issue?
Do you know who the editors are? Are they authorities in your field?
How good is the journal? Have you read/cited papers published in it? If not, you can still look at the papers in its current issues and draw your own conclusions about its quality.
Which databases are the journal indexed in? This is usually a concern, but since you mention "impact factor", that means the journal is indexed by the Science Citation Index, and that's the index to be concerned about. If the journal is indexed there every other index doesn't really matter.
How much is the article processing charge, and can you afford to pay it? MDPI is an open access publisher, so you can only publish OA with them, which usually means there's an APC. It's possible they're offering you free OA (this is especially likely if you're an invited submission, similar to how invited conference speakers often have the conference attendance fee waived). Otherwise they might simply be letting you know that you might be interested in this special issue, in which case you'll probably need to pay the APC.

But in the end the final decision is up to you. If you submit, acceptance is not guaranteed, although I'll venture that your chances are relatively good. If yours is an invited submission, then you might get to list that prominently on your CV; even if not, it's still +1 to your publication count. But preparing a submission will take time, and if you have nothing really worth publishing available, that might not be time well spent. It's up to you.


Job Advice for Pursuing a Tenure-Track Position in the U.S. (Postdoc in the U.S., Teaching-track/lecturer in the U.S., Tenure-track abroad) I am a PhD candidate in the U.S. institute, who wants to pursue a tenure-track job in the U.S. eventually. This year, my applications for TT jobs in the U.S. are unsuccessful (one offer of a TT job in Asia). I was told that applying to a TT job in the U.S. from Asia would become more difficult than staying in the U.S. Thus, I am looking into other opportunities (e.g. teaching-track, a post-doc in a U.S. institute).
Among a tenure-track job in Asia, a teaching track in the U.S., and a postdoc in the U.S., I wonder which options would be better to pursue a tenure-track job in the U.S. eventually?

In many fields and countries, it's rare to get a tenure-track position right after a PhD.  Generally speaking, if you want to go into tenure-track academia, a strong post-doc or two (or three depending on the field), with good publications is an asset, though it is also good to build up a teaching dossier.  I suspect the post-doc would allow you to be a more productive researcher than a starting faculty in the short term, though tenure-track in China probably has other advantages.


Post-doc requested only research statement; no cover letter? I'm planning to apply for a postdoc that asks only for a CV and a research statement describing "educational and research background, areas of interest, and what you would like to accomplish in your postdoctoral training."

Does this mean they don't want a cover letter? Should I be essentially merging the cover letter and research statement in one document? Because in a way it just sounds like they're describing what I would expect to be in a cover letter. Or is the cover letter just expected and I should do that plus a research statement?

Unless this is an online application with nowhere to upload it, you should always write a cover letter. It's not hard, and it brings that little extra. It allows you to tell your story the way you want it.

Even if there is nowhere to upload /send a cover letter, you should add a small "summary" at the top of your CV (one paragraph).


How does the acceptance rate affect papers decisions? Some conferences do maintain a percentage for the number of accepted papers to the total number of submissions.
Does this mean some good papers will be inevitably rejected just to maintain the acceptance rate? How conference chairs deal with the acceptance rate? or it is not related at all to the acceptance/rejection process.

Yes.

But it would be more accurate to say that conferences have a fixed budget of papers that they can accept, due to scheduling constraints.

At most computer science conferences, every accepted paper is presented in a 20-minute talk; for a three-day conference with no parallel sessions, this practice imposes an upper bound of about 50 accepted papers.  Of course larger conferences have parallel sessions, but program committees generally do not have complete freedom to add another parallel track, partly because of space constraints at the conference venue (which is planned long before the submission deadline), and partly because major changes to the conference organization usually require input from the community.

So inevitably, if a conference attracts a large number of strong submissions, it must reject some of them.  This is generally considered better than the alternative, which is that the conference must necessarily accept some bad papers.

This answer is specific to computer science.


What resources do you use when developing a new course from scratch? I am in the process of developing two new state-of-the-art graduate courses. In the past five years I have been heavily involved in these fields and will use my own research and research from other relevant groups. I am also looking at new course developments in other universities.

Are there any other resources that you use when developing a new courses from scratch? Can anyone give me additional pointers?

I'd go back and consult one of those "How to teach" books you've probably got lying around and focus on doing a good job of stating the course's Learning Objectives. Then, I'd make sure that the course material, the learning activities and assessment tasks are properly aligned with those objectives.

I would then make sure the students get to see those objectives and to understand how what they will be doing fits with those objectives.

I would design some sample assessment activities, such as sample exam questions (if that is one of your planned means of assessment). Then I would make sure that the content of your course is sufficient to enable students to do such assignments or answer such questions.

Mckeachie's Teaching Tips is an excellent resource for helping you do this. And it never hurts to refresh your didactic skills.


Can an editor review manuscript without sending to reviewers? I submitted my manuscript to a journal one month ago and the status is "with editor" up to now. As the editor of my paper is one of the leading scientists in the field of my research paper (mathematics), I would like to know that can an editor do the review of paper by him/herself without sending to other reviewers?

Yes, an editor can review a manuscript themselves, but you cannot infer an editor is reviewing themselves when a manuscript has been with "a journal [for] one  month...and the status is 'with editor' up to now."


Should I submit my paper to a journal that accepts papers quickly? Should I submit my paper to a journal that accepts quickly?

One of my batch-mate got accepted in a journal within 1 month. The journal was also listed on predatory journal's list.

Please advise.

Quick acceptance (a month) is pretty surprising for many disciplines, but that's not necessarily a bad thing in itself. But if the journal "guarantees quick acceptance", you should be very suspicious, since reputable journals do not bother with any rhetoric in that direction.

Being listed as a predatory journal is a very negative indicator... though, if we are scrupulous, we should note that those lists do not pretend to be infallible.

On the whole, I'd be suspicious. Better to go with well-known journals that do not promise such stuff.


IEEE disclosing resubmission at peerj I'm submitting a paper on image processing.

I previously submitted it to peerj, but they rejected it with this message:

  I am afraid that your submission does not fit our Scope -
  https://peerj.com/about/aims-and-scope/cs - because PeerJ only
  considers and publishes Research Articles with primary data and
  experimental results across the whole of Computer Science.

Ok, so I need to find a journal with a matching scope

So I tried IEEE transactions on signal processing.

On the web submission form I see this message

  Is this manuscript a re-submission or shortened version of a
  previously rejected manuscript? If you answer "Yes", specify the
  journal and manuscript ID of the previous submission and upload a
  response to the previous review. Please read the IEEE Signal
  Processing Society policy 6.16 "Handling of Rejected Papers" before
  resubmitting the manuscript.

The web form however does not appear to provide any have any field where I can specify the requested information. Also, peerj does not appear to provide any kind of "manuscript ID", since the paper was rejected, it is not even publicly available as a pre-print.

What should I do in this situation?

Usually, such kind of notes refer to manuscripts rejected by the same journal, not by other journals. In this case, the IEEE transactions on signal processing. The manuscript ID of the previous submission allows the editor to recover information about the previous process.

The IEEE Signal Processing Society policy 6.16, though not explicit, hints at the above interpretation (bold mine):

  If authors indicate instead that their manuscript is a resubmission, then they are required to upload a supporting document detailing how the new submission has addressed the concerns raised during the previous review. Authors may also request that the resubmission be handled by the same Associate Editor, if the Associate Editor has not retired from the board. The Editor-in-Chief will do his/her best effort to accommodate the author’s request while taking into consideration the balancing of the workload among the Associate Editors of the editorial board of the journal. A new Associate Editor may also be assigned to the manuscript by the Editor-in-Chief.

Indeed, the highlighted possible request is feasible only if the resubmission is to the same journal.

Thus, you should simply make a new submission, without reference to prior submissions to different venues.

When, instead, you are submitting a revised version of a previously rejected manuscript to the same journal, you can report the previous manuscript ID in the cover letter.


Is there a tool for showing trend in a technical research field? Does anyone know if there exists a tool to generate the trend of interest in a particular research field over time?

I am particularly interested in wearable computing. I know this field has been hot for the last few years, I would like a measure of this “hotness” using academic publications relating to this area. i.e. the number of publications related to the keyword Wearable Computing.

Is there a tool that shows the trend of publications in an particular topic similar to how Google keeps track of keywords that people searches for?

Note: I am specifically interested in technical research field, such that papers that would get published in IEEE or some computer science journals.

I use Scopus quite a lot and it provides the ability to analyze keywords (there is a link to 'Analyze search results'):

I was able to quickly obtain this plot for publications per year for the keyword 'wearable computing':

It can also be restricted to particular sources. For example
this one for 'wearable computing' in 'IEEE Pervasive computing':

Unfortunately you need a subscription to access Scopus.


Is a lecturer job early in my career a bad thing? I know some of you may say "it depends", but in the US is a lecturer position inferior to Asst Professor? I am in the job market and get lots of calls for adjunct or lecturer. In the interviews, it is emphasized that "you will be teaching large classes and your job will be just teaching".
My question is that if I get into a lecturer position at the start of my career - will that be a bad thing? I do hope to keep applying for tenure track jobs, so will my lecturer experience be considered?

Generally, yes, in the U.S. "lecturer" is a lower-tier, non-tenure-track job, while "assistant professor" is tenure-track. "Inferior" in that sense, yes, although it does happen that assistant professors fail to get tenure and must leave, while lecturers go on and on... admittedly, often term-by-term.

I think that once-upon-a-time any job other than the deluxe ones would have been a sign that you'd already not "made the cut", but nowadays things are so much tighter that it is widely acknowledged that not managing a "research post-doc" or similar is not a disgrace, but as much just bad luck.

It is true that the same factors that push one to a certain threshold so that bad luck becomes the dominant factor will most likely still be in play, so hedging one's bets should take that into account.

Your experience in doing serious teaching will be taken into account in the positive sense that not everyone is able to cope with this, but it is very much the bread-and-butter of academic mathematics, no matter what anyone says. Not glamorous or heroic, no, but...

So when you ask "will my lecturer experience be considered", well, yes, that's legitimate work, and not everyone manages it. But/and if you're applying for somewhat-upscale tenure-track jobs (=assistant prof), those lecturer jobs are approximately neutral. The question will be about what papers you've written/published... given that you apparently pass the minimum threshold of not-awful/intolerable teaching chops.

The most awkward part of such situations is that, often, doing sufficient adjunct/lecturer teaching to make a living leaves insufficient time/energy for scholarship/research/thinking, and this is not usually taken into account formally...


How should I take a potential PhD supervisor's age into account, when planning to follow PhD with habilitation? I plan to apply for PhD in Finance/Statistics next semester, and hence searched for potential supervisors.

An issue I have is that many interesting candidates are above age 60, and in Germany Professors retire at 65, such that a subsequent post-doc/habilitation would most likely require a different supervisor after PhD. One Professor just started his position at age 40, but so he has not many notable publications and I am unsure whether he might change university soon (he just changed it from another 4 years position).

Could someone advise me on the importance of age for selecting a PhD supervisor in context of a long-term future academic career?

The time for PhD would be 4-5 years, and PostDoc/Habilitation/AssociateProf usually again 4-6 years, with goal of potentially becoming Full Professor in Finance/Statistics.

First: a few people commented that thinking about your postdoc/Habilitation before even starting your Ph.D. is premature. I disagree. I have seen too many people coast along during their Ph.D. time without ever knowing what they are going to do afterwards, and certainly not preparing for their post-Ph.D. time, whether in academia or in industry. So I would say you demonstrate good long-term thinking. Already thinking about your academic career will help you prepare to work out a research program, network (more on this below) etc.

Second: there is no problem whatsoever with changing advisors between the Ph.D. and the postdoc period. To the contrary! If you stay at the same place for almost ten years, you will need to explain why you never moved, never checked out other places to work, other approaches to research. Many, many (most?) people will switch advisors at least once, or possibly even do postdocs in two different places.

Incidentally, this is why I think it is a good thing you are already thinking about your long-term future now, because it is never too early to start meeting people at conferences with your future in mind. You may just meet someone at your first conference who you could collaborate with or spend your postdoc time with.

So I would definitely recommend that you consider the older potential advisor. He sounds like he could introduce you to lots of people, and you will likely not need to pack up and move somewhere else during your Ph.D. period, which seems possible with the younger professor and which could somewhat mess up your personal life.

Of course, these considerations are all not the highest priority. You should definitely keep other aspects in mind in choosing where to do your Ph.D., like the kind of project you would be doing for either of the two professors, or whether the two of you "click" on a personal level, or what financing there is, or lots of other things you should discuss with your potential advisor ahead of time.

Finally, there is no Habilitation in Germany any more. Nowadays, Germany has moved to a more American style in academic careers. You will do a Ph.D., then a postdoc, then usually a Juniorprofessur (roughly, assistant professorship - not tenured and limited to six years), then get your Ruf to a tenured position. It's quite possible to skip the Juniorprofessur, though.