When does coming up with an idea constitute sufficient contribution for authorship? To what extent does coming up with a research idea, without contributing anything else to the actual work, constitute a sufficient contribution to be an author?

As a hypothetical, suppose a five year-old child tells me one day that he wonders if banana peels can be used to cure leukemia. I am intrigued by the idea and go and write a research proposal. The proposal gets funded (!) and I get positive results (!!). In this case, does the child deserve authorship for coming up with the idea, which I might never have considered?

On the one hand, I can say that some ideas are often very creative and novel to the point where just coming up with the idea is a significant intellectual endeavor (recognizing an unsolved problem, knowing enough theory to hypothesize what might work, knowing what has been tried in the past, using raw intelligence to put things together, etc.), while on the other hand, I could trivially write a script to brute-force-dictionary an arbitrarily long list of "ideas" and then scoop authorship on large numbers of future papers - "Umm, your paper's title was one of 43343895234 that I generated earlier this year with a script, I am entitled to have my name on your paper as an author even though I am not actually doing anything to help, since I had the idea first."

Ideas:

Coming up with an idea always deserves authorship as long as the idea was novel.
Coming up with an idea deserves authorship only when the idea-maker establishes a sufficient foundation for the idea. For example, randomly proposing a cure for cancer by picking random chemical names out of a dictionary and hoping for a jackpot cannot result in authorship, while providing a theoretical basis for why a specific chemical might work does, even if the idea-generator leaves it at that and does none of the actual experimental design, lab work, etc., or quite possibly is not even qualified to do so.
An idea is never sufficient for authorship. Proposing an idea, without doing any of the actual work, merits at most an acknowledgement or a citation ("Thanks to John McWhatever for coming up with the idea of solving the Closeability Problem by applying hyperparallelized matrices across the transverse manifold.", or "On an online Question and Answer site, Columbia (2019) proposed the use of banana peels in curing leukemia, but did not provide a theoretical basis or a practical methodology. In this paper, I demonstrate a clinically significant benefit of 10g banana peel topical tincture daily versus placebo in the treatment of leukemia....").

I will give an answer that applies to mathematics and maybe some other things. It isn't quite your second point, but close. Background first.

Newcomers to maths think of it as a bunch of facts. You learn some of those facts in early schooling but don't get a wider view. If you study maths at a higher level you think of it as proving theorems. Some facts and a bit of logic let you derive other facts. But if that is as far as you go, then you really aren't yet a mathematician. A mathematician is a person with enough insight into the workings of the thing that they can propose things that might be theorems if they could only be proven. But this isn't, to a mathematician, just making random statements. There has to be a reason why something is suspected to be true. Things that are likely to be true.

So, if the kid just randomly proposes a connection between bananas and leukemia, then it isn't worthy of authorship. But if a person with deep insight into the workings of the disease and the properties of bananas proposes it as a topic of study then, yes, they could/should certainly be a co-author of the study even if others do the actual proof of the concept.

It is the insight into the likely connection that has value.

Otherwise, you might just be sent off on a random quest without any hope of success.

However, in mathematics, if an advisor suggests a problem to a student, having the insight that the student hasn't yet developed, it is still pretty rare to demand co-authorship unless there is more of a collaboration in the development. But this is just the custom. Certainly it is worthy of acknowledgement, and maybe even co-authorship. It isn't even necessary in this case that the advisor have an outline of a proof, or even any deep insight into how to develop it. It is just insight into a problem worth pursuing.

But if it is, in mathematics, not an advisor-student relationship and one proposes an idea to another, I suspect that co-authorship would feel more natural, but probably with an acknowledgement section in the resulting paper that details the contributions. But in this case, also, it is more likely that the work would be developed cooperatively, so the authorship question would be obvious.

Other fields than mathematics have different views on authorship, of course, but it is, even there, a question of insight. Among an infinite number of roads, someone proposes one as worthy of following. If you follow that you owe them something for putting you on the path. How you acknowledge it is a matter of custom that varies from field to field.


Listing books read on a CV for undergraduate research in mathematics I am currently making my CV for undergraduate research internships in Pure Mathematics. I have read many graduate level books on the field out of my own interest. Whenever I was stuck on a difficult concept, I have sought the help of my professors and they can vouch for my understanding of these topics. Adding a section titled "Books Mastered" seems a bit narcissistic but I believe mentioning these books would add weight to my application.How can I leverage this experience and incorporate it into my CV?

How can I leverage this experience and incorporate it into my CV?

I'm not convinced there's any good way to incorporate this experience into your CV.  The basic problem is that it's unclear what it means to have studied a book: there's a huge range of levels of mastery that could all legitimately fall into this category.  Furthermore, many undergraduates have trouble accurately assessing their own knowledge and accomplishments, so a self-assessment of mastery is not convincing even if it's completely honest.  And of course honesty and bias are important issues.

The net effect is that these claims are vague, subjective, and unverifiable, which is exactly the opposite of what belongs in your CV.

You could always try to say something more precise.  For example, "I wrote out solutions to every problem in Hartshorne's algebraic geometry textbook" is much more compelling than "I studied Hartshorne" or "I mastered Hartshorne".  It's still not ideal; for example, it leaves open the question of whether your solutions were actually correct.  However, it at least gives a much clearer idea of how much you might have learned, and it allows the possibility of verification by requesting to see the solutions.  (Don't say this if you lost them!)

I wouldn't recommend trying to make precise claims like this for all your independent reading, since it would still come across as eccentric.  However, that would at least be a better option than just listing some books.


SpringerPlus asked me to review a paper already published I have gathered online that SpringerPlus is legit. thing and not some scam. But they emailed me (a  PhD student) and called me a Professor and asked me to review an article which was accepted in some other journal.

I feel like i should do the review because it's good for one's career, but this seems very strange. What to do?

You should immediately inform the editor and let them decide how to proceed further.

If this is indeed a double publication, reviewing it is a waste of time for you, other reviewers and the editor. In the unlikely event that there is some good reason for this (e.g., the other journal is a scam), the editor should be able to find out quickly or already know about it and tell you.

As for your reputation as a reviewer: If you see something very suspicious, reporting it is the proper action and is a job correctly done.

You should also ensure the following:

The other journal is really a journal and not, e.g., a preprint server like the ArXiv.
The mail asking you for a review did not mention this fact.
The mail asking you for a review really came from a reputable publisher (and did not only claim this).


Bad signs in a department for PhD Is it a bad sign in a department if most of those who do their thesis in that department also did their undergraduate studies there and most of those who get their PhD there either

are employed in said university

or more often than that

find themselves outside of academia roughly within 5 years after defense?

EDIT: The department is a European mathematics department. It is mostly focused on teaching. There are (maybe?) roughly 10-20 PhD students. The department has been around from 1959 I think. The country in question has a handful of universities.

I agree that this is generally a bad sign, especially your number 2, but I would add a "but" to this answer.

When the language used for teaching at the University is not English, situation number 1 can arise. Some department have a hard time recruiting and keeping researchers that are willing to learn a second language and teach in it.

Another way to evaluate the quality of the department would be to look at the collaboration they have with other institutions and the scientific literature they produce (among other things).


How to order and divide up "Invited journal articles", "Journal articles", and "Conference articles" on a CV? I recently presented a paper at a conference, and it appeared in the proceedings of the conference. I have now been invited to submit an extended version of the paper to a special issue of a journal. This issue will contain the top papers from the conference (but not all papers that appeared in the proceedings). This is relatively common practice in my field of computer science.

I already have listed some journal articles on my CV that were submitted without invitation and accepted. Assuming this most recent article is accepted to the journal special issue, would it make sense to divide my publications list into 'invited' and 'regular' papers?

Specifically, I am considering two options for headings:

"Invited journal articles", "Journal articles", "Conference articles" (i.e. split up)
"Journal articles", "Conference articles" (i.e. leave combined)

I'm not in computer science, so I'm not sure if these three headings would be a standard everyone adheres to. Still, generally speaking, you have some freedom in how to organize a CV. However, splitting a section into two doesn't look great if you don't have enough stuff to put under the new headings. Instead of making a new heading for a single invited journal article, I would suggest leaving it as one section, and marking articles to highlight noteworthy aspects (e.g. invited, won best paper award, featured on cover page, etc.).


Is it poor grammar to replace normal phrases with mathematical symbols in sentences in a mathematical paper? English is not my native language and when I read mathematical papers, sometimes I saw sentences such as

  The matrix A has rank ≥ n.

I am wondering if this sentence should be considered as grammatically wrong. I think the correct expression should be

  The rank of the matrix A is greater than or equal to n.

Are expressions such as "The matrix A has rank ≥ n" considered as acceptable in mathematical papers/theses/textbooks?

Are expressions such as "The matrix A has rank ≥ n" considered as acceptable in mathematical papers/theses/textbooks?

No, it's often considered poor style to incorporate fragments of equations like this into text.  I wouldn't go so far as to say it's ungrammatical, but many people consider it bad writing.  Some others don't care about this issue, which is why you sometimes see it done, but this is more common in informal or unedited writing.

The issue is that "rank ≥ n" is mixing together English and mathematics within the same construction.  If this doesn't bother you, imagine a more dramatic case like "n + five".  (By contrast, when someone writes "if x ≥ y", the inequality "x ≥ y" is a self-contained unit within the sentence.)  There's no logical reason why mathematical writing conventions couldn't allow this sort of mixing, but they don't.

Saying "The matrix A has rank at least n" is shorter and cleaner than "The rank of the matrix A is greater than or equal to n", but they are both acceptable.  I'd recommend avoiding "The matrix A has rank ≥ n" (I can't think of a good reason to prefer it, and avoiding looking bad is a reason not to use it).


Difference between Phd degree while remaining a student, and after quitting a Japanese university? I am currently enrolled at a Japanese university in the doctoral program of Mathematical and Life sciences, and have already been a student for last 4 years. I am waiting for the acceptance of research paper, and based on it, will submit the thesis for defense soon.

But I came to know that Japanese universities have a system where one can actually quit the university, but if the paper has been accepted, one can apply within one year for a thesis defense. A PhD degree will be awarded in the case of successful defense.

My question is, has anybody here been such a situation, and is aware of a possible difference between the technicalities of the difference in PhD degree, while remaining a university student, and after quitting the university? I know the concerned university or department should be the best place to answer it, but just in case anybody here can clarify that, I would be grateful for it.

At the minimum, will the degree obtained after quitting the university, would it be considered equivalent to the degree obtained while as a student or not? I guess other country universities don't have such a system in place. Thank you very much.

Disclaimer: my Japanese is quite good, but I'm not a native speaker, so please keep that in mind.

Based on the degree statutes of your university (広島大学学位規則), you need not be enrolled in the graduate program to submit a thesis and apply for a defense (Article 2 Section 3). However, non-matriculated students must pay a fee of 57,000 JPY for the defense. This fee can be waived if the applicant is not currently enrolled, but has completed the program and left the university without defending within the past year (Article 4 Section 3). If you wait longer than one year you can technically still submit and apply to defend, but you would have to pay the fee.

I spent 10 years at a Japanese university, although not the same as yours. I can recall one person who got their degree in the non-traditional way, so it is possible but uncommon.

I assume you don't have Japanese citizenship, so have you considered what will happen to your residency status? I can't recall the procedures, but you could run into trouble unless you have a job lined up and can change your status easily. I would discuss this with your adviser, but I can almost guarantee things will go more smoothly if you just wait for the paper to be accepted.  You may need to revise the paper based on reviewer comments as well. In the meantime, maybe you can apply for positions or spend time making your CV and dissertation look amazing.


Approaching Professors for Technical Consulting/Endorsement I work for a technology company and our company is interested in inviting some professors to review some of our recent technological innovation. It'd be more like writing an endorsement, or a preface for a book (and of course the professor needs to be comfortable with our work), so we can promote our products to the clients.

We don't have strong academia connections, so we might have to write some unsolicited emails to approach professors. Are there some tips regarding this kind of emails? I understand professors receive thousands of emails every day, so I want to make sure our email doesn't get buried.

Also, should we bring up compensation numbers in the first email, or this should be left for future discussion?

It's absolutely OK to write an unsolicited email to a Prof. Academics are contacted for all sorts of things, and your email will definitely be read. In writing your email, it's important to remember two things - 1. professors engage in things that they find interesting; 2. they fiercely protect their reputation.

So, since you are asking for tips, here are a couple:

Find those professors who are interested in maintaining and developing links with industry (as opposed to those who are focused primarily on advancing the theoretical foundation of their discipline). If you look at their profiles, such profs would mention consulting work, executive education, industry-sponsored research, and membership in professional bodies. These are the guys/ladies you want to talk to first.
Describe your product/project in terms of its intrinsic interest or novelty - that's what most academics will find interesting. From an academic's viewpoint, writing a preface or endorsement for your report is just a byproduct of learning something new and interesting about the field they care about.
That said, be upfront about the fact that you want something from them and that you are not seeking to influence their judgment in any way.

Whether to mention compensation in the first email depends on where you/they are country- and culture-wise. But to be on the safe side, I would not mention money in the opening email but use words like "consultation" or "expert opinion" to signal that you are happy to pay for their time and expertise.

Good luck! ))


As a course lecturer, should I excuse late assignment submissions if I wrote the assignment deadline slightly wrong? I am the course lecturer of an undergraduate course.
For a recent assignment, I had written the assignment deadline as 23 November 2018 (Saturday). Unfortunately, 23 November is actually a Friday, and not a Saturday.

I received an email from a student asking for me to excuse his/her assignment which was submitted late. The student explained that he/she marked the deadline as Saturday, without checking the assignment date.

Question

Should I excuse the student's late submission because I made a slight mistake in specifying the assignment deadline?

Note: We use a learning management system to receive assignment submissions, and the assignment deadline was entered correctly in the learning management system.

What I decided to do

For the current incident:
After reading the answers, and thinking it through, I decided that it is better to use the later of the two deadlines (i.e., 24 November Saturday) as the official deadline for the assignment.
I did make a mistake in writing the wrong day of the week for the deadline,
and students could have been misled with my mistake.
It is not fair to punish such students for my mistake.

For future courses:

The more places I put the deadline in
(e.g., the syllabus, the assignment itself, the learning management system),
it becomes likely that I will make a mistake somewhere.
In the future, I will put the deadline in only the learning management system, and refer students to check the deadlines there.

If the assignment deadline was not shown correctly to the students, then it is your error and they cannot be penalized for being late.

Claiming it is correct in one area while incorrect in another does not absolve you, you caused the confusion so you have to accept late submissions, as long as they arrived on Saturday...

Any submissions on Sunday will, of course, be late.

Re-reading this, it sounds a bit blunt... Probably because I have done exactly the same and had to sort it out after... Peace reigns if you stick to being fair, so giving them the extra time does not usually make much of a difference, except for the recognition from the students.


Receiving recommendation letters after graduation I am applying for a few different masters' programs and I need three recommendation letters total. I graduated from university last year spring, and when I send emails to the professors I had for my major courses, the majority of them do not respond (they responded when I was a student on campus).

Are professors more likely to ignore emails from students who are no
longer affiliated with the school?
Also, is it fine to accept recommendation letters from professors who taught courses that I received my minor in?

Are professors more likely to ignore students who are no longer
  affiliated with the school?

They often show the tendency for presenting the recommendation for the students, who had a live impact in their minds in view of academic performance, personality and so on. You can't expect from a professor to write anything useful about you, when he/she even can't recall you, deservedly.

On the other hand, leaving the academia and the school, within which the professor is affiliated, would not lead to his/her certain ignorance. In my own explicit experience, one my professors did present an awesome LoR for me, even though I'd left the department for more than 3 years. He did that with due attention to our constant communication and collaborating on some research stuffs.

  is it fine to accept recommendation letters from professors who taught
  courses that I received my minor in?

Yes. The recommendation should come from the person, who can depict you, as well as possible. The lecturer of a minor course, could who be able to hit this mark, would be a right choice.


Is SPIE Proceedings really necessary? I have got accepted for an SPIE conference. However, right now they are awaiting a manuscript for the SPIE Proceedings. Their webpage states that this manuscript has to be at least 6 pages.

The problem is that SPIE Proceedings are not peer-reviewed and most of the material I want to present in the conference is already published in a high-impact-factor journal.

My question is: what is the actual policy of SPIE (the one they really apply, not the official one). I want to present the results in the conference but I don't care about the publication. Does anybody have any experience it it is acceptable to skip the manuscript or make it just an two-pages extended abstract? My presentation has already been accepted for the conference based on the one-page short abstract.

SPIE does require the multi-page abstract as far as I know - in fact, this is one of the reasons some of the groups I worked with don't publish there, because it's a lot of work for a paper that isn't in a formal journal.

The technical answer to your question is that your submission could be withdrawn if you don't submit the abstract, as per their guidelines:

Conditions of Acceptance

By submitting an abstract, I agree to the following conditions:

An author or coauthor (including keynote, invited, oral, and poster presenters) will:

• Register for the conefrence & pay the fee.
• Attend the meeting.
• Make the presentation as scheduled in the program.

• Submit a manuscript (6 pages minimum for LASE & OPTO; 4 pages minimum for BiOS; 20 pages maximum) for publication in the Proceedings of SPIE in the SPIE Digital Library.
...

However, your main question as to what really happens if you don't submit the abstract?  Here is my guess:
I have tried to access various presented papers on the SPIE online proceedings after the conference, only to find them missing the full 6-page abstract (only having the 1-paragraph abstract).  This implies that they do not retract/adversely alter your submission's status if you fail to turn in this full six page abstract. I don't have any better evidence than this though.  (These were not invited papers either, but usually papers from companies who may not have wanted to divulge too many details in a full 6-page abstract.) It's possible that they submitted the full paper after the conference and I just didn't check again later.

Also, if you've already published the work in another high-impact journal, then I'd have thought it would be pretty easy for you to put the 6-page abstract together, and it won't impact your future publication plans too much. You can include new material in your presentation but omit this from the 6-page paper to prevent jeopardizing future publication plans.

Lastly, in case you do want to include new material in the paper, sometimes journals will accept papers that have previously been submitted to conferences, with the understanding that much of the work has been published before but at lower quality and usually lower standards than the Journal. One often does more rigorous analysis, includes additional details and work (measurements or simulations) for the subsequent journal pub. I often find conference papers with accompanying higher-quality (often longer) journal papers by the same groups, on the same subject, but with additional info/rigor in the Journal paper.

Update:

I spoke to an SPIE rep at the conference, and he said that you can indeed submit "anything you want" (my words) in the submission, and that even if the paper was too short they wouldn't penalize you in any way.
He did say that if you did that all the time they may become concerned, but in general the page numbers were a "guideline", not something to have your presentation rejected over.


co-authorship of the unresponsive and careless advisor? My paper, that is part of my thesis, has been accepted to a conference as a part of the poster session. In the paper, I have mentioned my gratitutes to my supervisors. In fact, an unofficial supervisor of mine who works at the same place with me, acted and helped me more than my actual supervisor deserves all the credits in this thesis. (My main supervisor lives in another city so that we met only 2-3 times, but the unofficial supervisor I mentioned helped me enormously as my official one advised me to work with her, no need to mention, she's not a faculty member but holds an associate professorship..) So it's a basically an unresponsive thesis advisor issue.

In the submission of my final version of the thesis for the conference, I want to make her my co-author if she accepts.
But as there is literally no input from my actual supervisor, I do not want to put his name. (He also said to me once that you made all the work by yourself without me or if she (the 2nd person I work on my thesis, who is not officially assigned for my advisorship) accepts what you did then I'm fine, so he does not care at all what's going on such that I doubt if he reads the final draft of the work I sent.

So would it be okay to not to include his name?
What do you suggest?
thanks in advance!

This is a common dilemma in academia that can quickly escalate to sorrow. My advice is short and straightforward: once the manuscript is ready from your side, politely approach your both supervisors and ask them directly about their expectations concerning authorship.
I understand the situation may feel uncomfortable and you'd prefer to make this decision relying on everyone's best judgement, but most of the times supervisors are overly touchy regarding merit and authorships.

Thread carefully there and be frank with your superiors. Good luck!


Is it reasonable to evaluate spelling/grammar in reports for students diagnosed with dyslexia? Students diagnosed with dyslexia qualify for accommodations at most universities. As with other special needs students, they're entitled extra time for work, exams, access or licenses to spell checkers, etc.

If these accommodations are in place, and assuming good grammar/spelling is part of the evaluation of work outlined in the university course syllabus, is it reasonable for an instructor to penalize students with dyslexia for making spelling/grammar mistakes as with other students?

I’ll go for a legal answer, at least valid in my current place of employment (France): dyslexia, which must be medically characterized as a learning disability for an individual, is covered by the laws regarding disabilities. As such, students impacted can request that exam conditions be modified for their benefit: most commonly by giving them additional time to “compensate” for their disability, but it could also include changes in setup (such as having access to a dictionary, spellchecker, or even a secretary). On the other hand, no leniency should then be granted on judging the exam paper.

The operating principle in all cases should be that of equal opportunity. (See here a summary of jurisprudence by the Association lyonnaise de droit administratif.)


Peer-review in ‘fully peer-review journals’ If, after 28 months of waiting and the third request, I within a few hours receive “Reviewer # 1: Sorry that this review took so long. However, this paper does not contain any results of value”, I know that the referee read only the author's name and, possibly, the title of the article.

If I get the message "How about you try to establish a reputation for yourself on several less serious questions before claiming to solve * both * the Goldbach and Twin Prime problems?", Then I begin to think that the solution of these problems is reserved for the author of this message And he was promised to show “the Book". Is it ethical to give such advice?

If they write to me “Yes, I will not accept this work. ... From very general considerations, I believe that you have a mistake in your work. Formally, of course, I have to specify it, but I do not want to do it because of saving my own time”, I understand that they read the work, they did not find any mistakes and  refuse, just in case.

Of course, the referee can save two hours of his time, and as a result, the author loses months, years, and sometimes, and all his life.
Obviously, in order to recognize the results of my work, courage is needed.
But, if “Reviewers' comments: ... I suggest rejecting it on grounds that it does not meet the standards of mathematical correctedness practiced by our journal”, I do not understand what is more important, form or content. I’ve always believed that the result is more important.

Sometimes they refer to feelings (“the referees felt given the methods you are using, it is hard to imagine that the results you claim are valid”), or belief (“I'm sure that your "elementary evidence" of Goldbach and the twins have mistakes, many years of experience does not allow me to believe in them, but I also can not spend time searching for them”).

But I'm not interested in the feelings of referees who did not even get acquainted with the proposed method and, I did not ask anyone to take my word for it. I offer the proof.

This is only part of the disclaimer, but there is not a single review or indication of an error.
Is it ethical for judges to make a conclusion about a job without reading it, but only on the basis of their feelings and assumptions about what is written in the article?

Is every referee a priori smarter than any author to such an extent that in several phrases pulled out of context, can determine where the author's thought can turn?
Should not the referee read the article at least until the first error and point to it? And if the error is not found, recognize the work as correct. Otherwise, he should declare himself incompetent and ask the editor to transfer the article to another referee
Really all mathematicians not only do not see, but also do not want to see beyond their nose?

How can the author get an honest, unbiased assessment of his work in this situation?

I think most of this question should be closed as a duplicate, and I would strongly recommend the OP read all of the highly upvoted answers here before commenting further:

I believe I have solved a famous open problem. How do I convince people in the field that I am not a crank?

However perhaps the last part of the question can still be answered:

  How can the author get an honest, unbiased assessment of his work in this situation?

Have your work reviewed by a close colleague who knows you better than the strangers your work goes to through peer review. Ideally, this is what an academic advisor is for, but other people can act as surrogates in some situations. The person should be someone close to you, who is willing to spend some time reviewing your work because of that relationship, but who has the academic abilities, rigor, and qualifications to review your work.

Impress upon this person that you fear your work has some error, because otherwise it is a very important finding, and ask for their assistance in finding the error. Make it clear that you are not looking for praise or affirmation, but want to find the error. Don't tell them how long you have worked on it or say anything else that makes it seem like you have some personal need to feel good about this work: you only want to find the error.

If together you actually find no errors, and given you have followed my advice about finding someone qualified, then, given the importance of your finding, I would expect this person to make every effort to help you with explaining the work to others.


In general, who can apply for research grants (in Europe)? Who can apply for research grants in Europe? Are there some degree requirements? Can students (undergraduate/graduate) apply for research grants? I know that the answer surely depends on the institution giving the grant, but I assume there are some general requirements, formal or informal. If you know (or even better, are) a student who has received a research grant, please tell how difficult it was. To clarify, I'm not asking about funding to do some degree, but funding to establish new research projects.

Rules will very strongly depend on the funding institution you're applying to, and even on the details of the grant program. Eligibility criteria are listed in each funding program, so go check up those programs that are of interest to you. Even restricting to “in Europe” doesn't help much, because Europe is a large continent with very heterogeneous research (and funding) institutions.

Regarding students (undergraduate or graduate), the only types of grants I can think of are:

grants to fund your degree; for example, getting a fellowship that would fund you during your PhD
grants that encourage international collaboration and exchange; e.g., the Chateaubriand fellowship to spend some months in a French lab, or JSPS fellowship for short stays in Japan.

A student is expected to devote his efforts to the project for which he is employed, not to bid for new research projects on their own. Thus, I don't think you can get funding for a new research project of your own, until you are an independent researcher.


Is it ethical for a lecturer to require students to purchase an online learning kit where kit is used for course assessments? I am taking a course in a may-not-be-top-but-still-decent university located in North America. The course lecturer forces us to pay for an online learning kit from Pearson by adopting all the graded quizzes provided in that learning kit.

That is, if one refuses to pay for the learning kit, he or she will have no access to all the quizzes, which in total constitute 20% of the final grade of that course. Moreover, all the text completion questions are basically exactly the same sentences copied from the eBook. Therefore, if you simply pay for the learning kit (~$50), then you will have a hard time doing the quiz as compared of those who buy the combo including the eBook (~$90).

In summary, if

you pay ~$90, during every quiz, simply do CTRL+F, you can always find the exact sentence in the eBook, and hence you can get nearly full marks.
you pay ~$50, you can access the quizzes, but you may have to search somewhere else and spend more time on the quizzes.
If you pay nothing, the 20% marks are gone.

I, as a victim who unwillingly paid $90, find it irritating and unethical, as I feel this is some sort of a coalition between the lecturer and the publisher. I understand that some lecturers do have recommended textbooks as well, but they are not mandatory! That is, if I can learn that course well by other books, I am free to do that. If I didn't buy the book and hence screwed the course up, that is my own responsibility. I cannot blame any one for that. But this lecturer's deed actually bans the students who do not pay for the learning kit from the quizzes.

Is this ethical? Wait, is it even legal? How may I fight for our rights as students on this issue?

I'll start with

  How may I fight for our rights as students on this issue?

For one, politely express your displeasure to the professor.

Some professors aren't in tune with the cost of textbooks, and may not realize what a burden it is to shell out $90 for their course, when it's $90 that you can't recoup by selling back the text, or avoid by using the library's copy of the text.

They may even think they're doing you a favor by offering this "interactive" system, not realizing that you don't find it useful.

If the professor isn't interested in hearing what you have to say, you can further express your displeasure in the end-of-course evaluation (my university's specifically ask about the textbook) and possibly in a respectful letter (signed by your classmates) to the department chair.

  Is this ethical?  Wait, is it even legal?

As the other answers have pointed out, it's not universally considered unethical or illegal.

As unpleasant as the result is in this case, it probably would not be a good thing to set too many bureaucratic rules on what textbook or other educational resources a professor can assign. Given that the cost of tuition is usually many times higher than the textbook price, it is generally desirable for the professor to assign the textbook that will (in his/her opinion) offer you the best educational experience and therefore, the best return on your tuition investment.

Of course, students tend to appreciate when the professor can find a low-cost option that is also educationally sound. But that's generally considered a bonus, not a requirement.

In this case it sounds like the extra content doesn't contribute anything useful to the educational experience - in which case, you should let the professor know. (Again, politely and non-combatively.)

I also want to point out that requiring "bundled" course content that goes along with the textbook is closer to assigning a required software package (which, unlike textbooks, you can't buy used or re-sell) than assigning a textbook. I agree with you completely that it's substantially different than being asked to pay for a textbook.

For every class I've ever taken that required specialized (non-free) software, my university installed the software on my laptop for me for free (given that I was registered for the course in question). In most cases, instructors try to use free software or software that comes with a free student license, because they realize that a software purchase is different from a textbook purchase. Or they'll provide the software on lab computers that students can use during set hours.

Imagine if you had to buy a new non-refundable software package for almost every class you were enrolled in, including buying the same software multiple times for a sequence of intro classes on a subject.

Yeah, it's a waste of money, but your professors might not see that unless you point it out.


Do all the co-authors of a publication own the content and may use RAW DATA, text, figure or table for their own publication? A third co-author C of a study in 2016 available on-line (under subscription) want to re-use the data (included in the figures or tables) of this paper with for others co-authors (A, B, D, E). Co-authors C and A are in conflict.These data will be presented and analyzed in a different manner to support its own and new data set in a paper that Co-author C want to submit as unique author. Co-author C will only use the published data (and not the raw data) of the study of 2010. Some raw data are available on-line (under subscription). However, co-author C only collected but not processed an insignificant part these data. After asking the editor permission that co-author C have (he is limited to re-use only 3 tables or figures), do co-author C has the right to publish part of theses data in a new paper as a unique author? these data are considered to represent (30%) of the data set for the new paper. Does the co-author C has the right to re-use the data without permission of the others co-authors (A, B, D, E)? The same may be also applied to the raw data already published as supporting data? IS the co-author C allowed to include in "material and method " or in "results" section some brief sentences describing how he gets the some of these data and these previous results in its new paper as unique author?
The PI request to include all the co-authors (A, B, D, E) for the new publication of co-author C. Co-author C is not agreed as most of the co-authors (A, B, D, E) did not participate in the elaboration, analyze and writing task of the new paper.

If authors A-E publish data, then author F can freely use that data. Author C has the same rights as author F: The data is public (to subscribers), anyone can use it.

  After asking the editor permission that co-author C have (he is limited to re-use only 3 tables or figures), do co-author C has the right to publish part of theses data in a new paper as a unique author?

By stating "[author C] is limited to re-use only 3 tables or figures," the editor only seems to be considering copyright. (The consideration seems rather naive, because using three tables or figures might not constitute a copyright violation.)

You can freely use all published data, you cannot include all published data (that might be a copyright violation).

  these data are considered to represent (30%) of the data set for the
  new paper.

That might be too much data to reproduce -- you'll need to consider copyright issues. This probably isn't an issue, because you needn't reproduce everything, e.g., From A et al. [Their Table 1, X], we can infer Your Table 1.

  The same may
  be also applied to the raw data already published as supporting data?

Yes, you can use all published data.


How should I know if my supervisor is deliberately ignoring my emails or he is simply bad in responding? I am a Ph.D. student in the third year, and I am working on my dissertation with two supervisors since my thesis is interdisciplinary. I recently noticed that my 2nd supervisor has not responded to my last 4 emails although I see he is active on his email. The answer to two of my emails could be even a simple affirmation! The first time I sent him part of my argument and asked his opinion, which he didn't respond. The two next times I sent an email to both my supervisors, which he didn't respond either. The fourth time, I sent him again, a very short and polite email, asking him if he could answer my email since I am defending my prospectus within the next few weeks and I need his opinion on it. Again, I didn't get an answer. It is really irritating. I don't know how to ask him if something is wrong! Due to this new virus, the university is closed, and the only way I can reach him is through email. What should I do? I've been thinking of changing this supervisor but his field of study is so close to my topic, and he is really knowledgable that I regret missing him  :(

Your situation has the first thing I would try built in - ask your other adviser for help.  Your committee probably communicates with each other, even if they're in different departments at the same school.  Tell the adviser who is responding that you're held up because the other adviser hasn't replied, and see what they suggest.  If they are indeed in contact with them, then they might be able to nudge a reply.  They might also be able to inform you of anything going on that might be causing this, like an illness.

If that doesn't work, or if your responsive adviser is so far removed from the unresponsive one that they can't help, go to someone else in your department.  Do you have other junior committee members that might be able to help?  What about a grad student adviser?

The bottom line is that, while professors being bad at replying to emails is sadly common, it isn't professional, and you should keep at it.  With as much politeness and tact as possible, of course, since this person has a lot of power over your future here.


Should I contact the universites that have not given me a decision yet after I have taken a offer? I am a student who just finished applying for a Ph.D. in Physics this year. I have not only received and but also accepted the offer from my dream school. However, there are three other universities that have not given me a decision yet. Should I contact them to let them know that I will turn down their offers anyway?

If the answer is yes, how should I word it so it doesn't sound weird?

It would be polite and helpful for you to let them know as it reduces their work. But a simple mail/email is all that is required.

"Thank you for your consideration, but I've accepted another offer."

No more is really needed.


Is it a good idea to protest for a paper rejection? Say that you submitted a journal paper and after some time you received a rejection. The comments of the reviewers were not that bad. Some of them are demanding minor revisions, some are demanding major revisions. The Editor however rejected the paper saying that the proposed model is unrealistic.

Is it a good idea to send an email and protest for such decision?

Before you protest, you should decide what, if anything, you want to accomplish. If you improve the paper and resubmit it your protest won't have counted for much, and you need to improve it anyway because of the reviewer comments. But the editor has questioned the underlying model, so this may be the wrong venue for publishing this work.

I suggest you think about the editors comments, improve the paper with the reviewer comments in mind and either resubmit or submit elsewhere. The last option may be best.


How important is the academic staff to student ratio? I've been looking at some universities abroad (I'm from Norway) like in Hong Kong (HKUST), but the academic staff to student ratio seems dreadful compared to others with 1:23. Still, people seem to think it's a really great place to go. Also, it's ranked 19th in the world in the course I want to take, Mechanical Engineering, despite this.

So, my question is, how much weight should I put in this ratio? Will it impact my education greatly when the ratio is so high?

If the ratio is about undergrad students, I wouldn't worry too much: those figures may vary wildly without the quality of the education dispensed being affected. For one thing, academic staff may not be all teachers, proportion of research vs. teaching time may vary, degree of implication of PhD teaching assistants (which do not count as academic staff) is not included, …

(The value given, 1:23, makes me assume that's what you mean)

On the other hand, if the ratio is about “grad students” and/or “PhD students” to academic staff, then yeah, you should give it a careful look. If the ratio is too low, run away fast! There are places that take too many grad students, if they can manage the funding, but won't have the human resources to advise/tutor/supervise them as they should. Trust me, you don't want to be in such a place.


Can I avoid having bad grades and a dismissal show on my record if I transfer colleges? I'm considering transferring to a school with a worse CS program to avoid 3 semesters of W's (withdrawal grades) and a dismissal on my record come graduation time. (Or would I just have more explaining to do?) Should I stick with my school?

Graduate schools generally ask for all of your undergraduate transcripts, not just transcripts from schools you got a degree from.
Transferring is a decision you'll have to make on your own, but it is probably not a mechanism to clear your record of Ws if that's your intent.
In the meantime, probably best to focus most of your attention on your mental health, followed by graduating itself, regardless of future plans past then.


Including conferences in the CV of an undergraduate student Do you think it is important to include a list of attended conferences in your CV when you are an undergraduate student?

And what about the seminars you have attended which did not provide you with a certificate confirming you took them? Should they be mentioned too?

Do you think it is important to include a list of attended conferences in your CV when you are an undergraduate student?

Sure, why not?  It's not likely to make a big difference in graduate school applications, but it can't hurt and might help.  This is not a particularly valuable form of information, but it's worth including when you don't have lots more to say (and undergraduates are generally in that position).

  And what about the seminars you have attended which did not provide you with a certificate confirming you took them? Should they be mentioned too?

In the U.S., certificates confirming attendance are irrelevant. I couldn't recognize an official certificate if I saw one (there's no standard format or protection against forgery), so I consider them meaningless, and this is a common opinion here.  If you are sending your CV to a U.S. institution, then you don't need to worry about this at all.  In other countries the customs may differ, however.


Literature management for workgroups We are looking for a solution to manage our literature (citations and corresponding PDFs) in our workgroup (~15 persons). Everybody should have read-write access, so a solution having a shared library would be the best for us.

Which workflows do other groups use for a common literature management? We've checked out EndNote, Reference Manager and Mendeley so far, but are not happy with the "workgroup" options these softwares provide.

I'll go with group-level Wiki on that one. Give every member of the group read-write access (or IP-based write access), and have maintain lists of references (and attached PDF files) by topic and sub-topic. If you want to include some notes on a paper, create a new page for that paper, and put your notes there. People can add their own notes to the same paper later, by editing the page.

Search capabilities will be important, so choose you Wiki software so it has decent search support. Or export all the PDF files of papers as a read-only network drive, thus allowing for full-text search of the whole database through client's OS (which is what I do myself).

For examples of wikis run by research groups, see for example professor Hero or SklogWiki (on which papers are ordered by topic).


Asking an editor about supplementary files to avoid journal overlength? Is it OK to write to the editor of a journal requesting that you be allowed to move some parts of the paper to a supplementary file, in order to incorporate the review comments and not exceeding the normal page length? If yes, how do we write such an email?

Some journals allow supplementary material, while others do not.  The first thing to do is to check whether supplementary material is routine for the journal that you are submitting to.  If so, then you may not even need to write to the editor, if your planned use of supplementary material will be like many other papers in the journal.

If supplementary material does not appear to be routine, then it's entirely reasonable to write to the editor handling your paper and ask.  A short and simple query is fine, much along the lines of the question here.  Do this as quickly as possible, however (so that you don't end up in a last-minute panic) and be prepared that you may be told no.


Does a ResearchGate profile count as a "personal website" for green OA purposes? According to SHERPA/RoMEO, many journals permit post-review preprints to be uploaded immediately to an author's "personal website", but apply an embargo period to "open access repositories" (example).

ResearchGate claim that individuals' profile pages on their site count as "personal websites" for these purposes, and thus that it is OK to upload to ResearchGate immediately. Is this true?

Caveats:

The fully correct answer to this is probably "we don't know until/unless a publisher sues and there is case law". But I'm interested in any pronouncements or arguments that have been made on the topic.
There are a lot of questions about ResearchGate and about sharing preprints on this site. I don't think that this is a duplicate of any of them... To clarify, following the close votes - I am asking specifically for the journal policies explained above, whether I can take the specific action described - not vaguely "is it OK to put published articles on RG".

The 2009 blog post you linked to makes the claim that

  each profile page within ResearchGATE is legally considered the personal website of the user

Similar claims had been made by Academia.edu and Mendeley, according to Michael Clarke at the blog Scholarly Kitchen. He elaborates on these claims following an incident in 2013 in which Elsevier sent large numbers of DMCA takedown requests to Academia.edu:

  William Gunn [of Mendeley] puts forth an argument that Mendeley has long used for hosting content they do not have explicit permission from rights holders to host: that an individual’s profile page on Mendeley (or by extension, Academia.edu) is that individual’s “personal website” and therefore covered under the exemption that many publishers provide to authors in both copyright and exclusive licensing agreements, allowing authors to post PDFs of their work to their own personal or institutional (e.g. their laboratory or departmental) website. Since papers are loaded to both Mendeley and Academia.edu by authors, the argument is that the paper is “self-archived” to the author’s personal website.

  Leaving aside the fact that many publishers permit only the author’s accepted manuscript (and not the final PDF) to be self-archived, were one to accept this argument, by logical extension this would mean any commercial site (Academia.edu, ResearchGate, Facebook, LinkedIn, Scribd, Google, etc.) that sets up a profile page would have the right to host any research loaded to the site by an author. The distinction between a profile page on an academic or professional network and a personal or institutional website does not strike me as difficult to make and if it were ever an open question, as Mr. Gunn asserts, the question seems to have just been answered by the legal department of his own employer.

More recently, some publishers have begun to explicitly specify authors' rights regarding posting on sites like ResearchGate, and that these are different from authors' rights regarding posting on personal web pages. For example AIP defines

  Within a commercial scholarly collaboration network (SCN) site:

  An SCN is a professional networking site that facilitates collaboration among researchers as well as the sharing of data, results, and publications. SCNs include, for example, sites such as Academia.edu, ResearchGate, and Mendeley, among others.

as a separate category from "authors’ personal web page and employers’ web page".


A job application asks for a "sample of current scholarship," what is this? I am filling out a job application, which asks to attach a "sample of current scholarship."

What is this?

I am guessing this means something like a published paper, but as a new PhD graduate, does the thesis count?

"Scholarship" is effectively a synonym for "research".  Send something like:

a published paper
a preprint of an unpublished paper
your thesis, or one or more chapters from it

Your advisor may have advice as to what would be best.


Independent research and license usage I want to  continue working on the research I used to work on when I was in school.
The thing is that I am not a student anymore, and I also do not work for the company that works on the research project I used to work on. It used to work on the research project by myself while I was in school (a little help from professors), meaning I can probably work/project on it by myself.

My question is that since I am not in school anymore, do I need to concern the license issue as commercial? All I want to do is do my personal/individual research project and submit a work to academic purpose, such as journal or conference. I see some software or programming library I am using say "Acedemy" or "Commercial", and since this is for the academic purpose, I am not so sure which one I need to follow.

You need to read the exact terms of the licenses, and see what they call “academic” or “commercial”. There is no general definition, these types of licenses depend entirely on the software publisher.


Updating a Professor on Denying School Offer While considering my options, I reached out to a couple professors to inquire on their work. Ultimately, I've opted not to go to the school in question, though I would love to work with that professor in the future, if he is willing to be a co-advisor of sorts. While he has not explicitly said he is willing to work with me, I'd like to send an email informing him of my situation.

I ultimately decided to matriculate [elsewhere], but would love assist you in your future work if at all possible.

I feel this comes off as if I assume he is already willing, but am trying to express the opposite, where the burden of "willingness to collaborate" is on him? If that makes sense? Thanks in advance.

Your original phrasing would be interpreted incorrectly, as if you were the professor wanting to help a student. A note would be good, expressing thanks. You can also say that you would love to have the opportunity to work with them at some point in the future. But don't suggest, or even hint, at joint supervision at this point.
After you are in the new program you've selected and have had a chance to meet with your formal advisor, you could raise with them whether including the other professor in a formal way would be appropriate. There are two issues. First all three of you need to agree on a single problem direction and the actual advisor might have their own ideas about that. Second, there has to be a professional matchup that works for everyone, but especially the two professors. You don't know of any existing dynamics already in place and you don't want to step into a swamp inadvertently. The formal advisor might also just be unwilling to deal with additional complications, and might even be insulted that they weren't consulted first.
But even if the advisor isn't willing there is no reason to give up contact with the other professor informally. A semi-annual note, for example, on your progress will keep them in mind of you and possibly open opportunities in the future. But go slow initially.


Is it bad form to cold-email professors to do post-baccalaureate research? Suppose I am interested in doing more research in a particular area in order to strengthen PhD applications, but I have just finished my undergrad degree.
Is it considered bad form to cold-email professors who say on their websites that they are accepting undergrad researchers in their lab asking to do research this summer/next year, though I’m no longer an undergrad?

If you are not an undergrad, you cannot be hired as an undergrad. Most undergrads are unpaid (don't work for free!), and of those that are paid, many are paid using funds that can only go to enrolled students (the percentage varies by field). Besides, most school-year undergrad positions are on the order of 10 hours/week, although some summer positions can be full-time.

According to @J.., sometimes new grads can be hired for full-time summer internships in a transitory capacity. Usually, this would be people continuing to work in labs they have already started with, or professors hiring someone they're familiar with. I find it unlikely a professor would hire someone new for only a few months, and if the opportunities were available, they'd likely to be posted.

Now that you have your degree, apply for jobs.

Cold emailing isn't a good strategy for that (especially not in the current climate), mostly because budgets usually don't allow to hire as many people as you need, much less to have money laying around waiting for someone to ask for it. Apply for posted jobs and work your network.


Why are some countries more popular destinations for higher education than the other? In the above table, we see that 4/10 countries are from the anglosphere. I am surprised to see Ireland and New Zealand not making into the list despite having well-developed economies and higher education sectors.
Switzerland and South Africa are also missing pieces.
China and Japan's popularity surprised me as China is not a developed country and doesn't have that many jobs to offer, and Japan has an unfriendly immigration policy.
Why are some countries more popular destinations for higher education than the other?

Why do some countries get more international students than others? Wikipedia gives a few reasons:

Traditionally the U.S and U.K have been the most prestigious choices, because of the presence of top 10 rankings Universities such as Harvard, Oxford, MIT and Cambridge. More recently however they have had to compete with the rapidly growing Asian higher education market. While US is the leading destination for foreign students, there is increasing competition from several destinations in East Asia such as China, Korea, Japan and Taiwan which are keen to attract foreign students for reputation and demographic reasons.

So university ranking is a major reason. Other reasons implied by this paragraph include competition: because international students pay full tuition fees, they are very lucrative, and universities want them. Therefore they send representatives worldwide to recruit students. Government incentives, e.g. less restrictive visa requirements, certainly help too.
Otherwise there is:

Due to the research base and funding opportunities, the USA was one of the key destinations of choice, especially in science and technology at master’s and doctoral education levels (National Research Council 2005).

Given that "Students were motivated to study abroad as they were also getting economic rewards from the skills gap they could fill in high-demand, technology-related jobs" (quote taken from the same source) it's natural that the countries with the most research funding gets the students. Historically, that is the US.
That explains much of your countries:

Ireland, New Zealand & South Africa don't have highly-ranked universities.
Switzerland actually has a high number of international students at tertiary level - 16.9% of tertiary students are from outside the country. It's not in that list because there aren't many tertiary students in the country in the first place.
China's research funding has been rising tremendously, plus there are top universities in the country.
Japan's R&D funding is also one of the world's highest, plus there are top universities in the country.


Why does a degree take several years to complete? The length of a bachelor's degree is often 4 years, a Master's about 2 years, and a PhD 4--forever years. This is pretty consistent across countries and disciplines give or take a year.

My question is: what is the rationale behind how long it takes to complete a degree? When or how was the current recommended length in years developed?

Specifically for a U.S. bachelor's degree, four years is a learning requirement, not a duration requirement.  By that I mean that institutions are constrained, by accreditation, tradition, and sometimes by law or regulation, to require learning (work) that can be competed in four years by a student working at "full load."   Where I taught, there was a legal requirement that specified the number of credit hours needed for a degree.

Some, perhaps many, students take longer—often much longer—than four years, but they complete the same number of credit-hours as the student who finishes in 3-1/2 years.  Some degrees, e.g. architecture, are five-year programs.  Similar reasoning applies to masters' programs.

Note that, in the absence of such a learning requirement, a university could just hand out degrees.  We call those "diploma mills."

So, the answer with respect to undergraduate education in the U.S. and often elsewhere, is that the amount of learning (work) is established by tradition and often embodied in law or regulation.  Someone who can complete that work in fewer than four years is free to do so; someone who takes longer is similarly free to do so.

Doctoral programs are different; the work is set out, at least in general, and can often be completed in about three years, but the student is time-limited to seven or ten years to be sure actual progress is being made.


How should staff address non-doctorate professors? Background:

I am in an administrative staff position, in a research compliance role, and frequently have to "cold" email professors I have never met or otherwise previously interacted with.  In my institution almost all professors have MD degrees, so I typically address them as "Dr. X."  However there are a small number of professors with master's degrees in areas of specialty that don't offer doctorate-level degrees, and I am uncertain how to appropriately address these individuals.

My gut reaction is to address these individuals by their first name (as our institution's culture considers first name acceptable for staff above you in the reporting chain), but to me this feels disrespectful when applied to faculty, especially considering the content of my messages are often directing them to do things (or stop doing things) they'd rather not.  Conversely, calling them "professor" seems unusual to me since I am not enrolled at the institution.  Finally, my school is very progressive, and I worry about (mis-)using gendered pronouns.

Question:

Am I worried about this unnecessarily?  How should I address these professors when I can't open by asking how they would like to be addressed?

as our institution's culture considers first name acceptable for staff above you in the reporting chain

First name it is then. Or you could go first and last name without a title. Or you can drop the name completely and just get on with telling them what they have to do. It sounds like you know they are all professors/faculty, which would mean using professor is not incorrect, although it is more formal than just the first name and the same as calling someone doctor.

I would steer away from Mr/Ms/Mrs for a couple of reasons. First, it introduces the gender issue you raise. Second, Professor is a higher honorific than Ms/Mr. Finally, working in a medical field where half the clinicians have a terminal masters and half have a terminal doctorate, I find it mildly insulting to use different titles for two people who have terminal degrees.


Research supervisor gives me no freedom-- controls all aspects of my research. Feel like a research secretary. Is this normal in academia? I'm currently working in a computational research lab where my supervisor just hands tasks to me to do that will help him with his papers but I don't get any input in the creative process whatsoever. For example, he's asked me to transfer data and create data tables but I'm never given any context for the project scope or involved in the planning or exploratory/research process, just in the execution. When a postdoc or somebody from another research group asks for his help with a random tech-related task, like debugging some computer issue, he hands it to me instead. I've been in this lab for half a year now and have nothing meaningful to show for it, besides scattered pieces of code written here and there and essentially serving as tech support for people.
I asked for the chance to lead a project and he assigned me one, but he said that he'll be assigning me the tasks which will eventually converge to a paper. I'm not given any context or "big picture" questions or allowed to take my own approach to answer them. He essentially has a list of pipelines he wants me to run and just output the results for. I feel like I'm just getting assigned busy work and not allowed to contribute my unique background/skills.
When I've been done with all my work, I've tried taking simple tasks and making them into a larger-scale project/applying more CS concepts to them but he disapproves and says it isn't priority and hands me more random tasks instead.
He has given me tasks to do late in the evening to have done by the next morning. I asked him to give me more advanced notice going forward to which he essentially responded "People in academia love their research so much that they don't mind putting in extra hours. If you're not willing to work after hours then maybe you're not cut out for academia."
I am totally used to and enjoy working long hours on research projects, and have done so without hesitation in past research experiences during undergrad because I had a sense of ownership over my work and freedom to be creative with it, but here I'm just working for my boss to help make his name bigger. I'm not getting authorship for my work or allowed to pursue long-term meaningful projects. I could be working as a software eng. making muuchhh more than what I'm earning (turned down lucrative job offer) but I chose this because I enjoyed the freedom and creativity involved in my past research much more than being handed random dev. tasks to make money for some for-profit corporation. But this doesn't feel very different from that aside from the huge paycut and having to take work home.
He also doesn't allow me to attend workshops/conferences at the institution I'm at. Every time I've asked to attend something that interests me he says "this other task is a bigger priority" or "that's irrelevant for the task you're working on" even though I'm really interested in exploring what other people are working on and networking.
So overall I feel a bit more like a secretary and less like a valuable member of a research team. Is this what all research is like in academia? If so, I'm concerned this may in fact be the wrong path for me. Any input/advice is very much appreciated.
Update I ended up switching to another lab and my experience is significantly better here. Some of the other researchers in my previous lab that I wrote about opened up to me about their experience there and it seems like the culture in general was pretty toxic (most of us have since moved on to new labs). Thanks everyone for all of your input-- it really helped me reach this decision!

I'm not a doctoral student, I'm a research associate at a research lab affiliated with a university in the US

So if I'm reading that right, you are not a student. You have completed your BS degree and you are an employee (if that is not correct, please clarify the question). The PI in the lab is not your advisor, he is your boss. So your boss is treating you like an employee, and not like a student. You should not be surprised by this.  You are an employee and a fairly junior one at that. If there is any mundane task to be done, it's going to come to you.  You will find that the experience of being a graduate student is very different than your current position. You will have considerably more ownership / freedom on the direction of your research (not total control, but much more), and you will definitely get authorship credit for your work.

Having said that, there is also considerable variation from lab to lab and from professor to professor in their style of working. Some professors will try to give even undergraduates a meaningful research experience, but others might treat even experienced doctoral students in the manner you have described.  You may have just ended up in a bad lab. When you are applying to graduate school, when you go to visit the campus, the most important question to ask the professors is: "Who are your graduate students and where can I find them?"  Then go ask those graduate students what it is like to work in that lab with that professor.  If you don't like their answers, then you know not to work in that lab.


Is it plagiarism to copy from the textbook and referencing properly but not using quotation marks? I have copied several paragraphs from our course textbook in my homework, however before starting the section which is from the textbook I have clearly stated that following sections are from textbook (name of book, author, chapter). But I did not put them in quotation marks.

Is that plagiarism?

Plagiarism is not a matter of quotation marks. The question is whether, when reading your homework, it is clear that the excerpts are not your own words but from some place else. You could also use an indentation for a paragraph, or put it all in italics. Quite often this is a matter of style guides or the preferences of the respective department or whoever is grading your work.

However, if you simply referenced a book, chapter or anything else at the beginning of a section and then started copy and pasting, at worst changing the order of paragraphs and mixing in your own words to connect passages, I'd have serious problems with that. Even if not reading your homework cover to cover (but let's say when opening a random page) it needs to be clear what is copied and what not and where copied passages are from. So yes, depending on how you have formatted and phrased the text, the omission of quotation marks may well be interpreted as plagiarism.

By the way, copying several paragraphs from any source will most likely not get you the best grade. Quote where necessary but focus on your own thougths and words and use the quotes to get your overall point across.


Does the graduate admission committee automatically consider you for a Master's program if they don't accept you for their Ph.D program? I am applying for Math Ph.D programs, some of the schools say in their websites that they'll consider one for their MS program if one is not accepted to their PhD program.

I was wondering if all schools are like that, or it depends?

Thanks

Some do, others don't. I have heard the term 'cash cows' many times when it comes master's student in graduate schools (Because PhD is almost always full funded in a way or another). Some schools might offer you an unfunded master's admission if you don't get into their PhD program, and many applicants think of this as a polite rejection.


Declining a paper review after accepting it and seeing the manuscript Most of the time, when I am invited to review a paper, I am only provided with the title and abstract. The full manuscript becomes available only after I have agreed to review the paper. As per this question, this seems not to be common in all fields, but it does seem to be the norm in the journals I usually review for.

I assume this is a way to minimize the number of people that get access to the content of the paper before publication, and only provide that "privilege" to those who actually give something back in the form of a review.

However, it might hypothetically happen that I agree to review a paper based on the abstract, but then I see the full manuscript and find that I do not have the required level of expertise to review the methods used in the paper.

If I now decline the review, then I am going back on my word, and the community will see me as less reliable. Furthermore, I have unfairly gained access to unpublished content without giving anything back.

If I do the review, I will not be able to accurately evaluate the contributions of the paper, and might (probably) recommend acceptance of something that might not warrant it.

What is the best course of action in this case?

The best course is to just inform the editor that you are unable to perform/complete the review as it is outside your area of expertise. The title led you to think otherwise. You are sorry, but others are better qualified to judge and give advice.

I don't see that as anything strange at all, and no one is likely to think less of you.

What would be wrong is to give a review of something you don't comprehend completely. No one benefits from that.

Just be honest with the editor. No one knows everything.


Is Academia.edu's "mentions" feature real? I just got an email from Academia.edu saying that my name has been mentioned two times (Edit: now up to 150 papers!), but to see the mentions you have to upgrade to a premium account at 8.25AUD/month.

This seems very unlikely to me, because

The name being mentioned is my nick name (and a very uncommon nick name!) and not my proper/working name
I'm not an academic, and haven't published anything! I have done undergrad research and a little bit since then, but nothing published, and also nothing really worth referencing.

Is the "mentions" feature basically a scam?

I just noticed that the mentions page now says this:

  We search for mentions of the name "Dannii Willis", "Willis, Dannii", "D Willis" or "Willis, D" in 20 million papers, books, drafts, theses, and syllabi on Academia, and around the web.

Which means that their count of mentions (currently fluctuating between 137 and 152 for me) must also include all of the David Willises, Dennis Willises, and Deborah Willises. What a joke!

Edit:

By searching on Google for my name in quotes and site:academia.edu I did find one paper that referenced a very old blog post I had written (and forgotten I had written!) But that's only one reference instead of two.

I guess unless anyone else has more data on the illegitimacy of this feature I'll have to call it real. But still a waste of money of course!

It is so clearly a hoax, trying to get more subscribers. Please, Academia.edu software engineers, do not try the "we make errors" card, as it is not believable.

I do believe they are legit, but this mentions baiting reeks of dark patterns. If they continue doing this, they will lose credibility with the public, and end up losing the one thing people are willing to pay for, especially in research: a trusted reputation.


How to find a math conference accepting papers? I have written a short math paper which may be suitable for a conference proceeding. However, I don't know how to find an appropriate (mathematical) conference  which accepting papers. Is there any suggestions?

Besides, do I have to actually attend the conference in order to make the paper accepted?

Thank you very much!

In mathematics, you're very unlikely to find such a conference.  There are a few (the only one that springs to mind is FPSAC).  There are sometimes proceedings based on conferences, but typically those articles are solicited after the conference from the invited speakers.  The idea of taking submissions of papers before conferences and then judging whether they are appropriate for presentation at the conference is pretty foreign to mathematicians, and publishing in conference proceedings is much lower in prestige than in journals.

Thus, I recommend you submit to a journal instead.


Advice/guidance when interviewing for a faculty or postdoc job via Skype or phone? Plenty of advice is available for standard interviews, should phone/Skype interviews be approached any differently?

(This was asked on twitter by @emilyandthelime, I have my own, partial answer that I'll post)

A major difference from an in-person interview is that interpersonal visual cues such as eye contact are absent or impoverished (even in Skype, because of poorer resolution / latency / smoothness than actual reality) and a rapid verbal back-and-forth is usually impossible.  So it's more difficult to assess the interviewers' reaction and when they've had enough of your answer.

Typically the interviewer(s) want to hear you talk about your research for several minutes and will ask a few rather open-ended questions that are mainly designed to get you talking. You should run with that and just keep talking and let the interviewer(s) say something when they want you to stop- it's too difficult to try to monitor their nonverbal reactions. Some candidates make the mistake of not saying much, in an attempt to not over-sell themselves or in an attempt to act suitably subordinate. The interviewer(s) really want to hear you describe your work in your own words and feel your enthusiasm and general attitude.

The interviewers themselves will realize that it's difficult to have a normal conversation rapport so don't let any awkward moments or technical difficulties stress you out, the main risk is that you won't say enough.

To show you aren't off in your own world, you can't use the normal nonverbal skills very much, therefore be paticularly sensitive to the exact questions they ask, but once you answer the specific question feel free to answer more broadly, a broad perspective tends to impress.


Grades and years after graduation What is the significance of undergraduate grades (2.6/4.0) after 5 years of work experience. Do they still carry a value? If your job is not research oriented, e.g. for me I am a software developer on various enterprise Java technologies, how should I project myself to admission committees?

What are your suggestions for me? Getting non degree classes BEFORE APPLYING etc.? Currently, I am in Turkey and I want to enter US Job Market possibly after a MS CS, but if I like I can continue with a Ph.D. So I am an international applicant.

Let me add a few points to aeismail's answer.

Whether your work experience counts as positive or negative also depends on where you apply.  You express interest in a PhD, which suggests that you are aiming for a research masters degree (with a thesis) and not a professional masters degree (just more classes).  These two degrees are very different.  For admission to a research MS program, your non-research work experience is unlikely to count in your favor.  Your work experience is much more likely to help if you apply to a professional MS program.  On the other hand, professional MS degrees are usually considered terminal, not as preparation for PhD.

It is possible to move from industry to a research degree program with a low GPA and industry experience—I did it myself—but you will need strong evidence in your application that counteracts your low grades.  Specifically:

You shold take the GRE — both the general and the CS subject test — and do really, really well, at least in the 80th percentile.  This is direct evidence that you're smart and that you know the field, counteracting the negative evidence in your transcript.  If you take the GRE and don't do well, step back, study hard for a few months, and take it again.  (Yes, this can get expensive.)
Your recommendation letters must imply strong potential for research aptitude, not just your coding ability or your ability to work in a team.  You need to tell your letter-writers to address this issue directly; otherwise, they almost certainly won't.
Finally, you should consider applying to take courses as a non-degree student.


Is it ethical to share the knowledge for free that I've learned at the university? I can see an enormous amount of videos on Youtube about helping to learn high-level knowledge that is usually taught at universities. Even though I'm only at the beginning of the time I'm going to take at the university before graduating, I have a desire to teach what I've learnt to others - for free, through the internet.

I believe that knowledge is global and free; however, I think sharing my knowledge wouldn't be fair for my teachers, or any other university teachers and professors.

Is sharing this knowledge fair  - or ethical?

I do not see that sharing your knowledge would in any way be a problem per se. What could become a problem is if you also share copyright-protected materials. It is virtually impossible to list what might or might not be such materials but to take other persons presentations, images, data and then sharing it would be clearly illegal (and unethical) unless they are provided with a "license" stating they are free. If you take the knowledge you gather and then put it together somehow (including making your own presentations on your own material), it should not be such a problem. In any circumstance where you want to use other peoples materials, it is always best to ask for permission. Not only does it save you possible future problems, you may find friends in the process. Watch out for materials published by commercial interests and use open source material (but do give credit to those who made it - attribution is required by licenses like CC-BY-SA and it is also a nice gesture to acknowledge the work and time by the original authors). Much material is given out for public (but not commercial) use.

A final advise, attach an open source license to your materials. I am not fully aware what licenses may apply but am sure many has good suggestions for you (check Academia.sx or ask another question on that).

So to sum up. I think it is a nice idea and perfectly fine, but be aware that you must be 100% sure you do not publish materials so that you break copyrights or abuse licenses (protect the open source practises).


I conceptually understand a result, but not its mathematical implementation – how can I defend using it? There is a particular result from another author that I wanted to use in my research which is a central component to my research question (it’s an animal’s growth rate). However, deriving the results computationally requires an understanding of some areas of mathematics that neither I nor my supervisor have had training in. The nature of my work draws heavily on objects from mathematical biology, and I’ve recognized that this is a weakness in my education portfolio I intend to fill when I do my PhD.

I was making some progress in learning the math on my own, but I occasionally needed to reach out to the authors for clarification because I had nobody else I could speak with. In the end, the authors volunteered to give me their code so that I could produce their results and allow me to proceed with my research.

I find myself in the conundrum that I don’t know how to reconcile or could defend when pressed by a committee: conceptually I understand what the authors are doing, but I lack the training and time to do the computations entirely on my own. Yet I have the tool I need to continue on with my research.

I feel like this scenario is not entirely uncommon, particularly for graduate students, but I’m wondering if a reasonable defence can be formed for using another’s work (given the context above) if pressed by a committee.
I only have an analogy that I would offer as a defence if pressed today.
How can I approach this issue?

When it comes to applying mathematical results, it is the norm that you do not understand all the nuts and bolts of what you are applying. This is nothing to be ashamed of. Instead, it’s the only way that modern science can work – it is too vast and intertwined to be understood in its entirety by one person. The crucial part is that there is a clear interface between theory and application where everything is communicated clearly.

To give an illustrative example: I recently wrote a paper where I derive some rules for building ecological models from basic principles. I did my best to describe said principles as well as the rules and their consequences so that those applying my work can use them. However, I expect that the vast majority of my readership cannot understand the mathematical proofs that go in between. I must expect that they treat this as a black box. On the other hand, in order to perform my proofs, I in turn relied on theorems whose proofs I did not understand.
Mathematical theorems are great interfaces. They give you some statement of the form: “If X, then Y.” You only need to understand the statements X and Y, but you do not understand why one implies the other. That’s what mathematicians are for. On the other hand, the mathematicians who proved the theorems I use have no particular expertise in ecology as far as I know.

Now, there may not always be a clear interface. In that case, I suggest to create one yourself (and not only for yourself but also for your readers): Write a passage for your thesis that describes what you understand and need the tool to do. Then back up everything with references from the relevant publications and documentation. If necessary, ask the authors again.


What to do if a colleague plans to submit the paper you worked on together without your name on it? I have been working with another postdoc on a paper, here is what happened: I presented a work of mine before it was published (but it is in my thesis and on arxiv) and he decided he will use the same exact model with a slight change. I have talked it out with him and finally with my lab adviser as he was not collaborating, and we decided to send the paper as coauthors after our adviser mediated the issue (though it was bumpy), even sorted out whose name goes first etc.

The methodology belongs to me and the application area is the same (topic), although he has written all the code practically (he said he wanted to learn and build a more modular code etc) I did contribute by writing small scripts but he ended up not using them.

My advisor has asked their collaborating institute whether I could join (the irony that my methodology is stolen but I need a pass to join the project) and they did approve it (I have all exchanges and emails). I spent countless hours discussing and working on the project with him, as he is working on another project I have little clue about the execution but he had to travel often and he made a presentation to the partner institute. I also suspect that my adviser got the patent of the code on his name as I have noticed he took my name out of contacts on github recently. I had not asked to be in the copyrights of his code but he has told me that I was going to be there relating the model. My adviser only wants to please the partner institution I am afraid. I was away for a week and before that my colleague and I saw each other very briefly and all sounded to be on track. He has run over time for the completion of the project so he is not working here anymore technically. Today I get no reply from him on multiple attempts and I learnt that he has removed his computer's hard drive and my adviser is off for vacation for an unknown time.

I suspect that my colleague will try to send off the paper we were supposed to write together without my name on it, I have email exchanges as proof but most relied on my adviser, whom I don't know if I should trust after the copyright issue. What do I do if he sends the paper without my name? Do I write to the editors? His partner institution? Is there a board for this?

I have been working with another postdoc on a paper, here is what happened: I presented a work of mine before it was published (but it is in my thesis and on arxiv) and he decided he will use the same exact model with a slight change

There is a misunderstanding about "publishing": you probably mean that it was not published in a journal/conference, but apparently you did publish your model, which means two things:

Your authorship on this is established
Anybody can reuse it, provided they cite your work appropriately

  The methodology belongs to me

Not really: yes you are the established author of the methodology, but it is now available for anyone to reuse it, as per the usual academic process (the only exception would be if you patented the work prior to publication).

  I have talked it out with him and finally with my lab adviser as he was not collaborating, and we decided to send the paper as coauthors after our adviser mediated the issue (though it was bumpy), even sorted out whose name goes first etc.

This is what gives you a (moral) right to be a co-author for this particular work.

  My advisor has asked their collaborating institute whether I could join (the irony that my methodology is stolen but I need a pass to join the project) and they did approve it (I have all exchanges and emails)

Avoid using the word "steal" if you published it: if all that the other author did was reading your thesis/paper, the only requirement is for him to cite the origin of the work.

  I also suspect that my adviser got the patent of the code on his name as I have noticed he took my name out of contacts on github recently.

Are you talking about an actual patent? If yes, for what? If this is about your methodology which is already published or about a code publicly available on github (under a particular license maybe?), it's unlikely that a patent would be granted, but IANAL.

  Today I get no reply from him on multiple attempts and I learnt that he has removed his computer's hard drive and my adviser is off for vacation for an unknown time

Multiple attempts over how long? If it's only a few days there's no reason to panic, he might be busy. Did you agree on a method to write the paper together, a venue to submit it or a deadline?

  I suspect that my colleague will try to send off the paper we were supposed to write together without my name on it, I have email exchanges as proof but most relied on my adviser, whom I don't know if I should trust after the copyright issue. What do I do if he sends the paper without my name? Do I write to the editors? His partner institution? Is there a board for this?

You should rely primarily on your advisor, and if they don't cooperate you should seek support in your institution, e.g. head of department or ombudsman.


should I publish in journal that has no IF I have written an article in the field of Information Systems and Security and I would like to publish it in a journal. From downloading the Scimago journal rank, I decided to publish in a journal called International Journal of Intelligent Information Technologies (IJIIT). The scope of the journal is really promising for my paper and appears to be in the quartile Q3 of Scimago.

My concern with the journal is that it has really low bibliometrics, I didn't find its Impact Factor, and and has an H-index of 12. The only thing the journal has is something called "Emerging Sources Citation Index". Wikipedia says that most journals with the Emerging Sources Citation Index index are predatory journals.

Is publishing in journals with no Impact Factor a bad thing for my carrier?
Can I verify whether this journal a predatory journal or not?

There's a lot behind your question that should be clarified.

You are not finding an impact factor for the journal because it is not indexed in Science Citation Index (SCI). All journals not indexed by SCI do not have an impact factor. SCI has its criteria for indexing, one of which is whether papers published in the journal receive citations from the other journals already in the index. Not having an impact factor is usually a bad sign in the sense that the journal is not prestigious. It does NOT mean that the journal is predatory.
ESCI is a lower-ranking index. Journals listed here are being considered for the more prestigious indices. Notably the ESCI does not feed into the SCI, but to the "next tier" of citation indices. If the best the journal can say is that it's indexed by ESCI, it's definitely not a prestigious journal.
I don't know what HSCX is and can't find it via Google, but assuming it's got to do with the h-index then it literally means nothing. A h-index of 12 means that the 12 most cited papers published by that journal/person have been cited at least 12 times each. Since this calculation is so generic, the moment a single paper is published, it can be calculated. If you've ever written a paper before, you have a h-index.
Quoting a h-index on the website does not mean that the journal is predatory. Predatory publishers do something completely different, the most important hallmark being they publish without really performing peer review. They can afford to publish junk because the authors pay for it (i.e. open access). Since the journal you linked is subscription-based, I can virtually guarantee it is not predatory.

tl; dr: the journal is likely to be low-prestige, but it is almost surely not predatory.

As to specific questions:

  Is publishing in journals with no Impact Factor a bad thing for my carrier?

Usually, yes. The more prestigious the venue of publication the more people read it and the better it's regarded.

  Can I verify whether this journal a predatory journal or not?

Yes. See this question.


Paper status "Accept with Shepherd". What does it really mean? Recently, one of my works have received the status of Accept with Shepherd. We have received many suggestions from the reviewers.

I'd like to know in more detail in which real status is my paper and if it has been accepted or it is in a sort of minor/major review.

The paper is for a workshop of a CS conference.

Your paper will be shepherded. The conference organizers will assign a contact person called shepherd to your paper, who guides you through a sequence of revisions (for further information, see the question mentioned by @darijgrinberg, and this question).

The "accept with..." decision signals you that they really want your paper at the workshop, stronger than in the case of a major revision. But similar to a minor revision, there's still a possibility that your paper will be rejected, if you don't work cooperatively with the shepherd.


How to evaluate a paper with concurrent results As a reviewer suppose you receive a paper (Paper 1) where one of main results is claimed to be concurrent work with another recently published paper (Paper 2). There is sufficient evidence to establish that this claim is true: (1) The proofs of the main result in Paper 1 and Paper 2 are completely different, (2) Paper 2 became available on arXiv only a few days before Paper 1 was submitted to the conference, and (3) Paper 2's authors are all fine with the claimed concurrency.

As a reviewer, should you judge Paper 1 based on its entire contributions, or should you judge it based on the novelty compared to Paper 2? If the former, it would be a clear accept. If the latter, it would be borderline reject.

Based on the information you provide I would recommend acceptance. The result may not be new (but only by a short time lag), but the other papers authors are OK with the coincidence. The result is interesting (else you would not clearly accept on its own) so it's good to have two different proofs.

Your response to the editor can include your argument for acceptance in spite of the recent appearance of the same result independently.