A person added his name to my articles Almost a decade ago, when I was a young student, one of my professors invited me to make a tiny undergraduate research under his supervision. The idea was to solve an optimization problem with applications in our country. I wrote five simple solutions: three of them using mathematical models, a fourth one using an algorithm, and a fifth one adapting the latter for computational implementation (I had to design data structures, rewrite the algorithm, etc.)

The only contributions the "leader of the project" (the guy who invited me) made were to suggest me to use a specific algorithm for the second paper, and then implement it as a computer software.

Here is the problem: when I gave him my LaTeX originals for the three resulting articles in a pen drive (I didn't have much experience with e-mails back then), he recompiled my articles with his name as first author, even when it's last name comes after mine in alphabetical order ... even when he did virtually nothing! He said he sent them to the university journal for publication, beacause I couldn't send them myself (he said).

Since I gave him the LaTeX sources of my articles in person, I don't have a record of my complete authoring. Even worse, I was young so I believed every word he said, and even put in my resume the description "Co-authored with [name-of-Professor]", so I naively acknowledged his name.

It has been 10 years from that moment, and I haven't found any of my articles to have been ever published. This professor said he was the advisor, so his name should be included, even when his apport was marginally minimal, and that I couldn't send them to another journal until we get a response from the university journal.

Now I want to publish the articles as chapters of a tiny textbook I am writing, but I think he doesn't deserve his name to be mentioned in any way in this work. Is there any way I could achieve this? Nobody has been able to help me on this matter here in my country.

I really want to publish these articles. They are not exceptional in any sense, but they are part of my work as a young mathematician, and they're even an important achievement, since I wrote them without previously knowing the subject. So they are important for me.

Thanks in advance for your answers!

Now I want to publish the articles as chapters of a tiny textbook I am writing, but I think he doesn't deserve his name to be mentioned in any way in this work. Is there any way I could achieve this?

Pretty sure the answer here is no.

First, your textbook needs to cite its references, so in the Bibliography, you would need to list the paper where he declared himself the first author.

That being said, you will probably chose some citing format for your textbook such as "According to [3]", rather than "According to DUDESNAME, 2008".

If your book is written in first person speech (which I dislike, but is your option), you can still claim "Back in 2007 I've done A and and B, as explained in [3]". Your former advisor will likely not dispute those claims with you, but you would probably gain very little from this passive agressive strategy.

Moreover, having your advisor who contributed very little as a co-author is very common. Although he usually would have contributed in other ways, such as providing equipment, references and guidance, which may not look like a lot of hard work, but it does take a lot of hard work to have the knowledge and resources to do this properly. Also, the co-author status is part of his reward for advising you. He making himself the first author sounds pretty unethical though.


Applying to a Math PhD program which doesn't require GRE as a physics/math major I finished BS degrees in math and physics, and doing MS in physics.

I will be applying for PhD programs (mostly physics), interest in mathematical physics, and have taken only the Physics GRE. I found that Stony Brook mathematics dept does not require math GRE, so I am asking:

Can one expect to reasonably predict if it look bad to apply without a math GRE score, given that my background in math is (all pure courses starting from multi-var calc/linear alg/diffeq two semesters of analysis one semester of abstract algebra, undergrad diff geom., two semesters grad. diff. geom., currently in grad. analysis (and of course self-taught measure theory and point-set topology, complex analysis)) all A's.

No publications so far, but independent study in physics in understanding solitons of various classical field  theories, and string theory interpretations (used a little diff. geo (ADHM)).

And could one be able to predict if recommendation letters from at least one string theorist in a physics department will have as much impact as a rec. from a mathematics faculty?

Thanks

I don't think it will prevent you getting accepted.  I followed a similar path (Physics + Math BS, Physics GRE only -> Applied math PhD).

But I recommend that you decide who you would like to work with in the places you'll apply to, and write them a very polite, short e-mail explaining your qualifications and interest.  If a faculty member is interested in you, GREs won't matter at all.


Should one keep record of papers one reviews? (and of the reviews themselves) Just like my other research-related activities, I keep a complete record of the reviews I perform: both the original papers and the reviews I have written, as well as the revised manuscript I receive one, and the final published manuscript if it is published (but sometimes in a different journal!)

I don't think I ever read anything in reviewer guidelines that forbid this, but I recently met someöne who argued that confidential material should be deleted after review. It's true that keeping it on my hard drive exposes it slightly to a risk of breach of confidentiality, but no more than the rest of confidential material that I handle every day…

So, what are policies on this matter and what are the existing practices?

I do the same (i.e., save all versions of a manuscript I receive and all of my and the other reviewers' comments that I receive through the review process). I save them in a single directory according to their manuscript number, which tends to keep things fairly organized and easy to find later.

Why might I want to find them later? First, when I receive a revision, I find it is a lot easier to go back and look at the files I have stored locally to see what I recommended change (in case it has been months since I first saw the manuscript), whether the author(s) did, in fact, change anything, and whether the changes were actually in-line with my and the other reviewers' suggestions. This came up recently when I received a revision that claimed to make changes but I found they had actually not made changes in the manuscript (the original and revision were strikingly similar) and I suggested a rejection.

The second instance where this can come up is receiving the same manuscript from a different journal (e.g., because it was rejected by the journal you reviewed for first). Having your previous comments and the previous version allows you to see how the manuscript has developed and either provide original feedback or reiterate points that still need improvement that you highlighted in your previous review. Or, decline to review because youf ind it difficult to present an unbiased opinion.

A third, and final, reason that I find it useful to save these things is pedagogical. In graduate school, several professors sent us versions of their reviews for manuscripts so that we could see how to write a peer review. Having manuscripts and your reviews available makes passing down that future pedagogical activity much easier. (Note that sharing manuscripts may be more controversial than sharing one's review, but if the paper was previously available as a working paper or conference paper and was subsequently published, I see little ethical concern with sharing the manuscript with future students.)


Transferring out of a Masters I am planning to complete a Masters in Physics (thesis based research) at my undergraduate institution after being rejected during PhD applications. I feel like this will bolster my research experience and strengthen my research application. After this, I plan to apply to PhD programs, both at my home institution and at other schools. Do PhD admissions committees favor a Masters degree with research? Did I make the right decision in going for a Masters?

In my own field (neuroscience) I don't think a masters really counts for anything in US PhD admissions (but these decisions are all made by humans on an admissions committee; maybe one of those humans reviewing your application likes a masters degree). Research experience you gain while doing a masters is valuable, however, it just doesn't matter that it's part of a masters program rather than a job or anything else. Sometimes a masters is the best access a recent grad has to research, though.
Unlike what Buffy's answer implies, in my field having a masters doesn't change where you are on the PhD track - you'll have just as many years and courses as someone coming in with a BS.
I can't say whether you made the right choice or if it will work out for you - no one can - but if you can gain experience in research and work with people that can write you strong letters of recommendation then this choice will increase your chances of PhD admissions. Whether it will get you into the program you want (or any program) can never be guaranteed, though.


How to handle pressure from collaborators when life circumstances make it impossible to get work done? I am looking for a bit of advice on how to handle the workload in a PhD while juggling several collaborative projects plus family pressures.

I am in the final year of my PhD which, overall, has been fairly successful to date. I am currently collaborating on a number of projects with other academics - most of which have been going on for some time and are nearing completion - which along with other work I am doing independently will form my PhD thesis. When I took on the projects I was confident that I would have the time and knowledge to turn them around fairly quickly.

However, I recently had my first child with my partner a couple of months ago and I have found it almost impossible to get much meaningful work done since (and also in later stages of the pregnancy) due to the pressure of supporting her and my child - sleepless nights, caring for the baby and her along with the additional strains on our relationship. I am now under pressure from most of these collaborators to finish my parts of the projects and this has been causing me considerable stress, which in turn has made it even more difficult to focus on projects and get them completed. I have to add that on most of these projects I have done a considerable bulk of the work, while other collaborators have at times been slow with their turn around, which is one of the reasons I now have so many ongoing projects. But I get the feeling that several of them feel I am now stringing them along but giving repeated dates for completion that I do not meet.

I feel under huge pressure and strain from multiple directions. I often do not check my emails for days knowing that there will likely be another email asking about progress, my relationship is suffering and I do not properly enjoy spending time with my child - my work seems to pollute much of my life now. Funding is not an issue as I have sources of funding that will take me well beyond the time I need to complete my thesis, but I feel I am burning bridges with other academics in the the field, which is causing me considerable stress.

I think I probably know what I need to do, but can't bear to do it... I have two first authorships and a significant authorship and am writing up a further two first authored papers. These alone would be enough for my PhD and probably a decent postdoc position. I should inform my other collaborators that I won't be able to work on their projects any longer, or at least not within the forseeable future. It would pain me to do this as I have already invested considerable time in these, and without my further input some (most?) would be unlikely to be completed and published, or would be inferior publications to what they could have been, as well as seriously damaging my reputation with these academics.

I would appreciate thoughts of people on how I should approach this - especially from people who have been in similar situations or have dealt with very slow and unreliable collaborators.

I've been on both sides of your dilemma, both as the slow and unreliable collaborator and as the person dealing with a slow and unreliable collaborator, and I deeply understand your dilemma and your pain.

The first thing to understand is that this is not an unusual situation, and you aren't a bad person for having it happen to you.  In fact, this is a fairly normal situation of life for most people pursuing post-Ph.D. research careers.  The basic problem is this: collaborations, grant proposals, professional service, and many other aspects of a scientific career all have long time horizons and high uncertainty associated with them.  That means that you often have to make a time commitment without really knowing how large it will be or what it will be competing with six months, one year, three years down the line.  What that means is that, no matter what approach you take to personal time management, you are likely to be frequently faced either with significant unfunded gaps, with majorly overloaded periods, or even both in oscillation.

At the beginning of a Ph.D., most people do not have this problem, because they have precisely one research project, and they can work consistently on just that project and their courses (and maybe TAing).  This situation sometimes persists to the end of a Ph.D. or through a postdoc.  As a person moves towards independence of a researcher, however, they start to have more opportunities and more choices, and are faced with this dilemma of planning under long-term uncertainty.

Unfortunately, under the current organization of academia at least, there seem to really be only two solutions to this problem:

Be low-ambition as a researcher, ensuring that you are never overcommitted but greatly decreasing your chances of obtaining a tenure-track position at a strong research institution, or of making tenure once you have one.
Triage and honesty.

The best advice that I have ever seen about the second path is in this blog post: "The only "balance" is in choosing which ball you are going to let drop today and deciding not to drop the same ball repeatedly."

Now, as to what to do: first, you need to be honest with your collaborators about the change in your life circumstances.  Having a child radically changes your life and your available time: as a parent of a 2-year old, I have about 20 hours/week less for work than I used to, and that's despite making compromises I'm not entirely comfortable with in the amount of time I spend with my daughter.  Science will expand to fill the time allotted to it, so the first thing you need to do is to decide how much time you are setting aside for family, and guard that time with your life.  Practice saying things like, "I'm sorry, I can't meet with you then, I have to be parenting then," and "I'm sorry, but this weekend I have family commitments." and spend the time you need to spend with your partner and your child.  Second, you also need to take care of yourself: if you aren't sleeping well and eating healthily, your research productivity will drop even as you spend more time working and your stress level rises.

Now, if you do this, it means that you are not going to be able to follow through on all of your commitments to your collaborators.  There simply aren't enough hours in the day.  And that means you're going to have to triage.  In my experience, the most important thing here is honesty.  In my collaborations, I can plan how to manage a collaboration in which somebody tells me, "I'm going to need to put this on the back burner for a couple months," or "I'm going to be able to spend only 4 hours a week on this," but I can't plan how to manage a collaboration with somebody who tries to conceal their overcommitment or who repeatedly promises things that they cannot deliver.

You need to figure out your priorities for investment on your projects, not for all time, but at least for a few months.  You can reassess afterwards.  Talk it over with your advisor, to make sure they're OK with it, and then let your other collaborators know that you've had to reassess your commitments and what they should expect from you.  Be explicit about the fact that it is becoming a parent that is driving this change: any collaborator that is worth continuing to work with will understand and respect this fact and be willing to work with you on this.  Anybody who doesn't is somebody that you want to be very cautious about continuing work with in any case.

And make sure that you have enough space to enjoy time with both your child and your partner.  Our time in life is far too short and precious as it is.


Can you apply for a faculty position via a recruiting agency? I came across some job advertisements for faculty positions that stated

  Strictly No Agencies

This implies that some agencies apply on behalf of the applicants. Is it common? Is it possible at all? I mean do open positions without the above statement accept applications sent by agencies rather than the applicant?

I know that the recruitment for senior industry positions is outsourced and handled by agencies, but this should be a different case.

I have never, ever, encountered a faculty search - or indeed a postdoc search - handled by an agency.

Nor have I ever been contacted by an agency looking to handle recruitments as a potential candidate, despite getting ads on sites like LinkedIn that suggest I've been accurately categorized as faculty.

In the vast universe of possibilities, I'm sure there are exceptions, but my best guess is that this is boiler-plate language that goes in all job ads from that institution.


Is it ok to publish a picture from a dataset without permission? I am writing up some research I did using a Kaggle dataset:
https://www.kaggle.com/c/dogs-vs-cats

I want to include one or two images from the dataset in my paper to show the types of images I'm using. Will this run afoul of copyright issues?

The rules for the dataset say:

  These images have been published by Microsoft Research for the express purpose of furthering academic research. They may be used for non-commercial research purposes, but they may not be re-published without the express permission of Microsoft Research.

Including an image in my paper is use for non-commercial research purposes, but it is also re-publishing them without the express permission of Microsoft Research. I asked this question on the Kaggle forum, with no response in several weeks, and there is no contact information for anyone at Microsoft Research.

More generally, is it acceptable to publish examples of images from publicly available datasets even if there is not an explicit copyright license? What about ImageNet, where they took images from all over the internet? Is any paper that publishes examples from ImageNet (there are plenty!) breaking copyright law?

If you are publishing (like in a journal) then it is for commercial use, just not for your commercial use - the publishing company makes money off of your publication.  Therefore you need to get permission as stated in the agreement.

It is almost always a requirement that you get permission under these circumstances.  When it is not is when the licence explicitly says so and you are following the rules


What is meant by real-world scenario in research papers? I'm asked by a reviewer to extend my manuscript (which is about cognitive radio network) to include one real-world network scenario. The exact words are:

  "The authors should augment the paper with one particular
  "real-world" network scenario and demonstrate the functioning and
  performance of SE-CRN (my scheme name)."

Now I'm in puzzle. What is meant by the real-world network scenario? Should I take simulation parameters exactly as those stipulated in the IEEE 802.22 standard, and will this suffice to satisfy the reviewer's question? Or does it mean that I have to implement my scheme in real experimentation?

I can't speak to your specific review, but I can comment at the higher level and give an example.

When a reviewer is asking for a real-world scenario, they are typically asking for an actual situation when the proposed approach will apply and could improve existing work.

The idea behind this type of request is to avoid seeing a large number of papers published that do not make a significant contribution, but are just variants on existing ideas. In these situations the ideas are often relatively obvious within the assumptions being made. The problem is that we can make up all sorts of assumptions and write papers about them. But, if the assumptions have no correspondence to any known problem, this isn't really advancing scientific knowledge.

To give a concrete example, in one of my first papers I wrote about how certain upper bounds could be incorporated into an existing algorithm. In my context I had found an application that provided these upper bounds, and then I reasoned about how I could use them to improve performance.

I was later told that someone else had considered these same types of upper bounds (in a slightly different context) previously. But, their work hadn't been published at a prestigious venue because they had simply asked the question "what could you do if you have these bounds". They were unable to actually provide a problem (that is, a real world scenario) in which the upper bounds existed. My work, in contrast, was published because the bounds were motivated by the domain that provided them.

In your case they want to know if you can talk about a situation where SE-CRN matches some set of operational constraints in the world and will thus be useful (have better performance) in exactly that situation.

From a networking perspective if you, for instance, made up a new packet congestion model and designed an algorithm to handle that model, but couldn't show that the model was relevant in any known application, you would get this sort of comment about looking for a real-world application.

--

Addendum: When papers are evaluated, reviewers typically use several different metrics of evaluation. These include things like significance, clarity, novelty, correctness, etc. Some fields will include validation or experimental results. The question of a real-world scenario is primarily addressing significance. That is, what is the measure of the impact on other researchers and practitioners in the field? Things like simulations are evaluated in comments on validation/experiments. The editors of a journal then have to trade off strengths and weaknesses in different areas when making a decision.


Using company names in research papers? I'm doing a study about soft drinks showing their effects on a certain group of people. I'm using brand names like Coca Cola, Pepsi, etc. and I wonder if I can use the names in the research paper and I if it can be published in journals.

If these names are trademarked in the US, it's my understanding that it is legal in the US to use these marks to refer to companies that they describe in any publication. Look at how financial sections of newspapers or websites daily refer to the companies that they report on and the products they sell. However, it's possible but unlikely that you could be sued anyway. If there's any confusion in your writing that Coca-cola or Pepsi in endorsing your article, watch out. You and your publisher may be in their sights. This is unlikely if you're simply doing a taste test or comparing marketing strategies, but you should be careful with the use of other's property without their explicit permission. Just like the Fair Use defense in the copyright context, a nominative use is a defense in court if you get sued, not a get-out-of-jail free card. These kinds of suits are so rare against academics that I can't name or find any.


How much does "having publications" mean to a undergraduate direct-PhD applicant? I am an EE student specializing in Communications and Networks (actually a bit more on sensor networks/signal processing) who plans to apply for a direct PhD program in the top US universities.

I have seen some undergraduates who have been directly offered PhD programs by the top electrical engineering (EE) US universities, e.g. MIT, Stanford, and UCB.

Needless to say, they all have a super high GPA and some have very good GRE scores. (I say some instead of all here, because MIT does not require GRE at all!)

Besides these two characteristics, they have also published several papers whilst undergraduates. Maybe just by coincidence, they are all from Microelectronics. As a layman in Microelectronics, I heard that it would be relatively easy for an undergraduate to publish a paper in this field, because a lot of publications are experiment-based.

But it seems quite difficult for me and other peers who also specialize in Communications and Networks to publish some work during as undergraduates. It seems that publishing something in this field requires more knowledge that is out of the scope of a undergraduate.

Do most of the EE undergraduate successful applicants have publications? What about in the Communications and Networks field?
If an applicant has no final results (papers), but a 9-month research experience, will the experience help? By how much?
How can a undergraduate applicant outperform a master applicant who holds some publications during his/her master study?

Remarks:
Any generic answers are warmly welcome!

While I can't comment about microelectronics or EE specifically, I should point out that many US graduate schools admit external candidates only to a Ph.D. program; there is no option available for admission to a master's program en route to a doctoral program. Consequently, the students met the requirements for admission to the school, period.

Research experience is always helpful, particularly because it gives you a potential letter of reference from someone who can directly comment on your skills as a researcher, which is the biggest thing that graduate departments are looking for. They want candidates who are capable of doing high-quality research, and having confirmation of that—whether or not there are papers already written—is a vital component of that process.

I would also suggest it's probably not worth it to try to compete with faceless peers whose credentials you can't guess. That's a hopeless endeavor that will just make you frustrated and dispirited. Just do the best job that you can with the resources available to you, rather than worrying about "keeping up with the Joneses."


Professor doesn't reply email even after I talked to him? So basically a professor pitched his project that needs research assistants at an event in my department on Monday. I talked to him after the event about 5 five mins, telling him my background and that I am really interested. I sent him my CV after the event on Monday evening. Now that Tuesday has passed. I still didn't get any reply from the professor. What should I do now? Email him again or go to his office directly (now it is the exam period so he probably doesn't have office hours anymore)?

Wait. As Buffy said, a day is virtually no time at all. The professor may be trying to give others a chance to respond, or may just be busy with other things. While your zeal is admirable, overdoing it will raise red flags. If he invited applications on Monday, I would wait at least until Friday before following up. Depending on the local culture, dropping by his office in person on Friday (or the following week) may be a good idea; otherwise, I would (again on/after Friday) just send a brief e-mail saying that you are still interested and that you hope to discuss the position with him soon.


One of my group members did not contribute anything and I notified my course lecturer. Did I do the right thing? So to describe the scenario, here is what happened. We were assigned a group task for business throughout the entire semester. Each of us discussed what topics to cover and came up with an equal amount of workload for each member. I had noticed that close to the due date, we were quite far away from finishing the assignment (I myself was to blame as well) but we managed to pull it off by the very last few hours before it was due. Except for one of my team mates who did not post anything into our collaborative assignment document, but did mention she had her research ready and was ready to start. We also had a couple of team meetings with our course lecturer to notify our progress and also clearly stating the deadline of this task so she was completely aware of what to do and when to finish it by. I overlooked this until about 1 hour before it was due (as I was working during this time) I noticed that her piece of information was missing. I gave her the benefit of the doubt, and thought maybe she was finalising everything and then going to pull it off last minute. But nothing happened so I desperately tried to contact her only to find that she was completely offline from the phone and her provided social media. So we ended up submitting an incomplete assignment. I ended up contacting the course lecturer and he stated that considering what had happened she will receive a zero.

I later received a message the next day, stating an apology and her explaining how she had some "issues". She did not go into detail but I am assuming they are quite serious. Hence, I now feel extremely awful about her getting a zero. Should I recontact the course lecturer about this?

p.s I was definitely very disorganised with this assignment as I think i did not communicate often enough to encourage each other to complete parts by certain deadlines.

No, you didn't do the wrong thing. She did not notify you in advance of the deadline, and you needed to submit to avoid incurring your own penalties. She and the instructor can sort out the mark - it may be that her issues meet the guidelines for special consideration for example. Ultimately, it's none of your business and not your responsibility.

I know some instructors think that group work is a good way of preparing for teamwork in the real world. But, in the real world, problems like this are handled by the boss, not the other team members. On the other hand, you should learn from the experience to have all the team members commit to completing their pieces in advance of the deadline (preferably a week or so in advance if there's enough time), so that you have a chance to resolve such problems before the project completion date.


Using a letter of recommendation from freshman year professor? I am an electrical engineering senior, and I am preparing to apply to Master's programs in three different fields: communications engineering, embedded systems, and computational engineering. I need two LORs for each program. The problem for me is that my best recommenders are professors from my freshman and sophomore years. My grades, classroom-interaction, etc. actually deteriorated after that point.

I have identified four potential recommenders, but I ruled out one of them (a comms prof) because he indicated to me that his letter will not be very good.

My remaining options are:

A Microwaves professor with whom I have taken several courses and gotten A-,B+, and B. I got the A- in a 300 level course I took as a sophomore.
A networking professor with whom I got a B+ recently, and had at least minimal interaction.
A math professor with whom I got an A in a 200 level course (multivariable calculus) as a freshman, and had plenty of interaction. Math was my passion at that time. The prof also encouraged me to become a math major.

My dilemma is: a LOR from number 3 is possibly so much more positive than 1 and 2, but it is for a 200 level course that is not engineering. I don't think it is very relevant to any of my target fields (communications, computational engineering, and Embedded systems). And, I took that course three years ago. I was a different person, socially, academically, motivationally, philosophically, etc. Should I rule out number 3?

In short: if you don't have better letters of recommendation, then you should go with the ones that you have available.

If the best letter you can get is from a non-EE person, I wouldn't rule it out on that basis alone. If the person can comment on your potential as an EE, that would make things better still.


Language requirements for postgraduate studies in UK and Canada? Universities are autonomous institutions with independent requirements and decision making procedures, on the other hand there must be some widely recognized standards.

What is the most recognized English language certificate for postgraduate (physics) studies in UK and Canada universities?

P.S. EU citizen

IELTS is widely accepted in the UK, and it is also accepted by the UK immigration authorities.

ToEFL is also widely accepted by universities but is no longer accepted by UK immigration authorities.


How to Cite With Inconsistent Use of Initials There is a paper I want to cite where, on the title page of the article, the authors names appear without any middle initials (i.e., one of the authors is Mark Smith).  However, this one author frequently publishes using his middle initials (i.e., Mark E. Smith).  What is the appropriate way to cite this-with the name as it appears in the article, or the name as the author typically uses it?  For what it's worth, the source article appear in a mathematical journal, and I want to cite it in a paper that will eventually appear in a mathematical journal.

You should use the exact information which is provided on the published paper, not the real or current information of the author; even if his name or affiliation1 is change at the present time.

Moreover, the correct way of citation of each paper is provided in the webpage of its publisher and you can check how they have mentioned the author's name in the citation example (you may also download the bibtex or other outputs to be used in citation manager softwares). At least, by checking the publisher website, you will be sure how they prefer their published paper to be cited (even if other possibilities/doubts for correct citation exists).

1I know that affiliation is not mentioned in citation, but if somebody wants the affiliation of the author at the time of publishing the paper, the best source is the information written on the paper and is provided in its publisher's website.


How to organize the referee report of a paper? One part of the work of any researcher is to referee the work of other scientists in his field. This is a time-consuming and volunteer work, that is made with the idea of service for the community.

My main question: What are the standards of organization for the referee report of an article?

For instance, is a "general comment" section (mostly, explaining why the paper should be accepted or rejected) and a "specific comments" (in the form of a list of precise comments e.g. "Page $2$ line $4$: typo. It should read X instead of Y") enough? Or do people organize the review under specific sections like "Typos and writing", "Missing definitions", "Scope of the paper",etc...

I wish my report to be as useful as it could for the author, so I am inquiring about the best practices for referee reports.

PS: It may be a field-dependant question. I am mostly interested about standards in mathematics, but answers for other fields would be interesting too.

I organize my reviews in the way that I would like to receive them, sorted from most important from least important.  My general structure is:

First, I summarize my understanding of the the key ideas and contributions of the paper.
Next, I give my judgement and main reasons for this judgement.
Third, I have a "Major Issues" list of other scientific problems that I think absolutely must be addressed before publications
Finally, I give a "Minor Points" list of nitpicking, language issues, typos, etc.

The first two sections show that I have understood what the authors are trying to say, and the big picture issues.  The third gives the contributing factors, but tries to make it clear that fixing these without fixing the big picture issues won't change my basic judgement (if that judgement was negative).  The final is things that will improve the paper but aren't really affecting my judgement.


Should non-native speakers get extra time to compose exam answers? Today I met with a student who had plagiarized answers on an exam from online sources. She explained to me with apparent honesty that she had spent too long answering the first two questions and then run out of time. In her telling, being a non-native speaker makes grammatical writing in English very slow going. On this exam, I expected the students to write approximately ten to twenty sentences in an hour.

Sometimes our academic counseling department requests disability-related accommodations which allow certain students 1.5x or 2x time for an exam. However, I've never seen one related specifically to speech and language.

Does non-native speech warrant extra time when writing exam answers?

Disability conditions are applicable when there is an uncontrollable disadvantage that prevents the person fairly demonstrating their knowledge, skill and ability in the same timeframe.

This is not the case for a person who has and takes the option of moving to a country or region where their language proficiency is not sufficient to demonstrate knowledge or skill.

Such a person has the choice of developing their language skills to sufficiency or of simply studying at a university where the common language is one they are fluent in. They control the situation and therefore, it is their obligation to resolve it, not the assessor's duty.

Where these two groups intersect is a case rare enough that it should be handled on its own merits according to any applicable policy and law (which most likely will mean the extra time is given to account for the disability).


Supervisor not Constructive I'm a PhD student and I just had my half-time examination. My supervisor thinks my data is "crap", my report "wasn't good", and my presentation was "a disaster". Maybe he is right. However, he doesn't seem to know how to provide feedback constructively.

At other times, his feedback is either vague ("these slides could use a little more oomph") and only helpful half of the times ("the standard way to analyze this is to...").

I am not sure how to cope with with this type of feedback, mentioned in the first paragraph. Any ideas?

You may want to separate two types of issues here:

the presentational issues of your work
the scientific issues with your work

The first of these types spans presentation style, style of writing, and the structure of your written deliverables. The second one spans all scientific aspects of your work.

You should definitely be able to get some feedback on the scientific issues. If your advisor says that the data leaves room for improvement, (s)he should be able to give reasons for that. Also, if you ask how (s)he thinks how the data could be improved, you should get a usable answer, as this is part of the role of an advisor.

As far as the presentational issues of your work are concerned, you may be well-advised to ask ofther people for help (e.g., your fellow PhD students). Scientists often learned how to do that well by "learning by doing". This doesn't imply that they are also be able to explain how to do it in the right way. The quotation "these slides could use a little more oomph" suggest that this may be the case. But actually without knowing your advisor, it is impossible to tell.

It may also be that that your advisor is expecting you to engage more in discussions with him/her. For example, if (s)he said "the standard way to analyze this is to...", then (s)he may expect that you provide a rationale for the choice of your approach. This discussion can then lead to a better understanding of your work, both for your advisor and you.

Again, because of the limited knowledge of your situation, it is difficult to tell whether this is really the case in your situation.


Does physics education research support the idea that answer keys are bad? This is a physics education research (PER) question. Interpreted properly, it is NOT an opinion-based question!

I am a physics grad student and several of my professors have stated that they are against the idea of posting answer keys (i.e., worked solutions) for homework and/or tests (after the assignment has been completed by the student, of course). Their argument is that having an "answer cheat sheet" discourages the student from thinking critically about the problem and presents the opportunity for students to feel like they understand how to solve a problem without actually going through the rigor themselves. In fact, the entire department apparently takes the same stance with regards to posting past qualifying exams online: they post the past exams to use for studying, but not answer keys.

My question: Does any published PER examine the pedagogical benefits and downsides of posting answer keys/worked solutions for students? I tried searching for this online, but had little success finding anything. If anyone could point me toward legitimate research on this topic, I'd appreciate it.

I should add that I was a high school physics teacher for two years, and within that arena it seemed unanimously accepted that making solutions and answer keys available was the right educational strategy. Hence my skepticism of my professors'/department's rationale. But I'm willing to see what the research says!

I won't have a hard answer, especially one specific to physics. I did find some papers that looked somewhat relevant though. Please take this with a grain of salt as I've mostly just skimmed them, and this isn't my academic area of expertise.

This paper found that comparing different methods of reaching an answer was more effective than looking at methods of solution sequentially. This says more about how students might best use an answer key than whether they should get one.

This 1992 paper found that practice examining worked problems or completing partially worked problems was more effective at transferring knowledge than conventional problem solving. In keeping with the first paper, this paper by the same author showed that variability in the examined worked problems was also important. This would indicate that for a subject that students generally have a hard time wrapping their head around, like physics, the ability to study completed problems at the same time may be a useful tool.

However this excellent article discusses how you can go too far the other way, with advanced learners fairing better without information they already know clogging up their study material. Overall this makes a mixed approach (some problems with worked answers for comparison, and some problems without available answers) seem best if the strength of the prior knowledge of students is unknown. (Assuming students gravitate to the type of material best for their individual needs.)

(opinion on practicality) However I'd note that in the context of a college class, giving a set of completed problems, rather than additional turned-in assignments, doesn't create a pretesting point-of-accountability to further incentivise study. Also your department policy may relate to things like professors who sometimes want to reuse questions from previous tests. So attempting to change may be resisted because you may unintentionally be asking other professors to take on more unwanted workload.

Some of the research terms I found that you might want to look at further include 'Cognitive Load Theory', 'Aptitude-Treatment Interactions', 'Expertise Reversal Effect', and 'Instructional Science'. You'd probably also be well served by skimming through a proper textbook on education techniques if you can find one that's suitably well cited.


Soon to have a PhD in theoretical biology - now what? So, in a bit more than 1 year, I will have my PhD. I have been doing well, I will probably with 4 papers published by the end of it. However, I have been feeling a bit empty. I feel like I started doing research because I thought I could make some difference but I'm feeling less and less that isn't going to happen.

So, I don't know what to do. Obviously, I could do a pos-doc, but I'm a bit afraid of the feeling staying there. I was considering other career options, but I don't really know what to do. One thing that I like is computers and I wouldn't mind working for cybersecurity, particularly associated with cybercrime. The problem is that I have limited knowledge. I do know that some people start working for software companies with PhDs in unrelated fields, like physics. Is it the same possible with a PhD in theoretical biology? I deal with maths and programming a lot, but can I expect that people will want me for that kind of position and offering me some basic training?

In general, are there any other career options for theoretical biologists besides academia?

Might I suggest you look at the idea of becoming a patent attorney? It would afford you the ability to use your current level of knowledge on your subject and also learn new things everyday.

This website has articles on careers in intellectual property (IP) and related job postings.


Is there a common standard for the title hierarchy of research positions in English? Is there a common standard for the title hierarchy of research positions in the English language?  Excluding people who do research such as students or professors, but purely researchers.  Something in engineering such as, Junior Programmer and Senior Programmer.

I have heard of these, and in what I assume is a hierarchy:

Research assistant
Assistant researcher
Researcher
Senior researcher

Is there such thing as "Principal Researcher" which describes the job position as opposed to the PI on a project.  Would this title be given to more than one person in the same lab?

Purpose of the question:  In other languages, specifically in Asia, there are many words for hierarchy in both business and academia.  Google translate does not work, as it just recommends "senior" for many of the words, but in the native language they are much different, and are all above the standard "Researcher" position.  The research institute would like things like business cards and website to make sense to other countries and native English speakers.  As of now, the native language shows two different words, but in English they are the same "Senior Researcher", which makes it difficult to understand/explain what position the person is in.

Is there a common standard for the title hierarchy of research positions in the English language?

No.

There is no defined, consistent hierarchy of research job titles anywhere in the world, at least to my best knowledge. Essentially, every university, often even individual departments, handle job titles, responsibilities and hierarchies slightly differently, even if of course a lot of common patterns exist. Don't assume anything about hierarchy purely based on titles.


General vs field specific journals in mathematics What are the pros and cons of submitting a math paper to a general journal vs a field specific journal?

There are so many general journals today,
and sometimes there reputation is not nessecerily better than a journal devoted to a specific subfield.

Given that, is there any reason to prefer a generalist journal over a field specific one?

It's a bit difficult to disentangle this issue from prestige, since many of the most prestigious journals in mathematics are general.

At the very top of the prestige scale (Annals and a handful of competitors), there are no specialized journals at all.  Specialized journals start to appear a little lower on the scale, and they become more common as one descends further, as well as more specialized.

To a first approximation, prestige is the more important factor.  For example, given a choice between GAFA and Transactions of the AMS, GAFA wins on prestige despite being quite a bit more specialized.  There may be other reasons you might prefer the Transactions (for example, the publisher's policies, or a desire to support the AMS), but if building an impressive CV is your primary motivation, you should go for prestige.

On the other hand, going with the broader journal is a good heuristic if you aren't sure which is more prestigious or don't think there's a big difference, since it's correlated with prestige and therefore tends to give a good impression.

Towards the bottom of the prestige pyramid, people may raise an eyebrow at overly specialized journals, since a paper acceptance doesn't mean much if it's in a venue specifically designed to ensure that specialized papers not easily publishable elsewhere find a home.  Of course that doesn't mean the papers are bad, but they won't look impressive on a CV.


Are authors identified by the chapters they contributed to in multi-authors books I wrote 4 chapters of a book, and three more authors wrote other chapters.
I was expecting that each chapter would reference the author who wrote it, but the editor says it is customary not to do this, so the book will have us four authors as collective authors of the book, without any reference to each chapter.

Is this really customary?

It seems so to me. YMMV by the field, but I can't recall reading any books cited like that, except for compilations of essays where the "chapters" are really papers that are functionally distinct from each other.

Presumably you read a lot of works in your field. Go grab 10 books with multiple authors and see if any of them have a capter-by-chapter authorship breakdown.


Who to ask to write letter of recommendation: the professor who knows me better or the one that gave me a better grade? I have a question in regard to choice of recommenders.

I'm applying to my dream school and I want to make the best choice for my LOR. I have two recommenders, one is a professor and he doesn't really know me, but I got an A in his class. Another one is a faculty, he knows me better than the other one, and he asked me a lot of questions in detail before writing the letter, but I only got a B in his class.

Which one should I choose to have him write me an LOR that's going to my dream school?

PS. I asked them both because I wasn't sure which one would be willing to write me the letter, but I only need one letter.

The B instructor's letter is promising; it may be more insightful and more diligent. An impersonal letter that says "the student earned an A" may not sway any admissions committee. You could even inquire directly whether or not he's going to mention the B grade in the letter.


How to Cite a conference talk / TED video? Is it okay to cite a TED presentation or a video lecture or something similar? If so, how to cite that video for your paper/thesis?

A quick google "apa cite video" would give you lots of advice, such as http://www.easybib.com/guides/citation-guides/apa-format/youtube-video/ which notes:

Last Name, F.M. [Username]. (Year, Month Date). Title of video. [Video File]. Retrieved from URL.


Should I use both surnames when addressing a Spanish professor as 'Dr' in an email? I'm writing my professor. She has two surnames. So far, I've been using only her first surname; however, I'm curious whether that's, generally, how I should address a professor with two surnames. I don't know whether the addressee's culture affects the answer, but the professor is from Spanish South-America. (I've noticed that some Spanish people use only the first of both last names, but most English people who take two names ask others to use both names.) Also, I don't whether familiarity matters but we communicate frequently enough that I begin my emails with 'Hi Dr...' instead of 'Dear Dr...'.

Thank you

Mexican here!!

We also have two surnames, and to be perfectly honest we do not mind if you use both or only one of our last names.

People call me Dr Palafox and my former advisor (Who is the head of the CS department) Dr Benitez. We are talking people from all the spectrum of workers, from administrative and cleaning staff to general directors. So is perfectly fine to use only one last name.

Actually is going to sound weird if you end up using both names, because we rarely do. Even the President is rarely called by his 2 last names, unless is a very specific situation.


Is it acceptable to mark off or comment on someone's presentation based on their non-standard English accent? I am working as a TA for a seminar course and class presentations are considered a significant part of the total mark for the course.

Some of the students in the class — who mostly happen to be international students — do not perform the best presentation in terms of the communications of ideas with the audience.

It is mostly because of their thick accent and other flaws in their English, making the presentation hard to understand for the audiences.

What is the best marking strategies in these situations?

I am skeptical about commenting on this issue and discussing the problem with the students or reducing a part of the mark for the lack of communication quality, as I am afraid it would come across as racist.

The university is in North America and about 80% of the students are native speakers of English.

There are two ways to interpret the issue that is being raised. One is that the people simply have accents and not completely correct grammar in spoken English... but not to the point that it seriously impedes intelligibility. The other is that their English is so poor that it does greatly impede intelligibility.

The former is of little consequence, of course. The latter is a serious problem, in fact. It's not about bias for/against languages/nationalities, but about the context in which one operates. If one cannot communicate effectively, that's a minus. Even if/when people are "understanding", it's still not a plus, but a minus. Overcoming such an impediment should have a pretty high priority... as opposed to simply believing that such an issue solves itself in time. In particular, this will not happen for people whose English is sufficiently compromised that they spend nearly all waking hours with their fellow speakers, and thereby never practice the local language (as Dir. of Grad. Studies in Math. at my university on two different occasions, and participating in such issues for 35+ years, I've seen many cases).

In particular, outside of super-special cases, it serves no grad student well to have English be an obstacle. It will significantly obstruct their hiring on teaching-communication grounds, if nothing else. And, unavoidably, it reduces the impact of their portrayal of their research work.


Advantages of different citation styles? I find it hard to find a comprehensive overview about what kind of citation styles there are, and what should be taken into consideration to choose one.

It seems to me that the most important factor is when the journal/conference requires a specific citation style. Another factor is that it might be better to use what the people in the field are used to. But what advantages are there for different citation styles, apart from the fact that some are more established?

E.g. I see that numbered citations sorted by occurrence make it easy to find the citation listed in the bibliography while reading the paper from front to end. (Author,Year) citation styles allow the reader to recognize names but could possibly be ambiguous when an author published two papers in the same year. Why aren't both approaches combined to keep the advantages of each, and cite in-line with (Name Year [1])?

There exist strong differences in humanities vs. STEM how literature is read, written and therefore cited.

For example, in humanities it is much more important due to e.g. schools of thought who has written something than in STEM. Even in STEM some journals ask you to give the page of a book when citing those, some not.

There is likely no good overview, because in the end the editor should know best, what citation style is the most efficient and useful one for the content, format, author- and readership of that journal.

In STEM many journals don't want all author names in the reference list, rather due to shortness than usefulness imho. To me, personally, it's often much more important to see which last author/group leader conceived an experiment rather than which first author PhD student did most of the exeperimental work with >5 other co-authors which becomes more and more common.

For review articles with >100 references it's often simply not practical to show all co-author names. For letter articles, representing often high importance of the results, the first author et al. often publishs several papers focusing on a dinstinct research question/method/object and deserves more highlighting and fame.

Even withing a single scientific branch like physics you will therefore find very different citation styles serving different purposes for different publishing formats.


Write a paper based on forthcoming chapter in a book I have a forthcoming book on a given topic. I would like to extend a section that deals with a significant topic per se into a full (though not very long) paper. Would the paper be desk-rejected?

The chapter includes the following on that subject:
- background
- methodology
- applications

The paper would provide a background and methodology (similar, obviously), but I underline that this paper brings new relative to the forthcoming chapter:
- further applications
- a more detailed presentation of the methodology.

Is it a long shot? It is worth expanding into a paper?

In the worst case scenario, I can just leave it as a working paper and present it as part of the book at some conferences, I guess.

The main issues here are that you can't self-plagiarize, and you most likely need to convince the referees and editors that there is sufficient "novel" content to justify publication. If there is enough new material in the paper, you should be able to prove this. If you feel yourself "stretching" the arguments too much, then it's probably not such a good idea.

An alternative would be to write the paper as a "successor," rather than as an "expansion."


Advisor transferring to better school I am currently at a Top-20 engineering school in the US. I am making great progress on my PhD and have an excellent relationship with my advisor.

My advisor is transferring to a Top-3 engineering school and wants to bring me.

I am concerned because I'm afraid that the Top-3 school will reject me (average undergrad GPA, crappy GRE, etc.). The good things I have are a fellowship with 3 more years of tenure, a high quality paper and a few talks.

Anyways, when advisors move does the new university just automatically accept students? I'm afraid that my bad undergrad GPA and GRE score will keep me from following my advisor and doing the research that I love.

The other school is hiring your adviser because they think they'll be a good researcher and faculty member. This means that at some level they trust your adviser's judgement.

It's not impossible, but it'd be highly unlikely that they would refuse to admit you against your adviser's request. The more likely situation, if they're concerned about your ability, is that they would ask to have you repeat some courses or milestones like an oral exam or portfolio review.

When they hire your adviser they're essentially saying that they're impressed with their research program. It'd be a little self-defeating to hire that person but say that they can't bring substantial portions (the students) of that effort.


How could one best go about research in Pure Mathematics, whilst holding a full/part-time job? I am still working towards an undergraduate degree in Mathematics, however I don't believe it's possible to think about research too early. I'm thinking about going in the direction of Pure Mathematics - possibly in the area of Number Theory and Logic.

I have edited the above title, as I think it reflects more the question I was trying to ask.

I was really wondering if anyone firstly has an answer to my above question, and also if anyone could recommend good places online where one could follow current research activity in the area of Pure Mathematics. Number Theory, Logic, and Foundations of Mathematics particularly interest me.

Thanks in advance.

I have published a little work in number theory while working full time. There is no big secret, just read about the problems that are at a level you can solve, solve the problems and publish the results.

Publishing in a journal as an unaffiliated researcher is harder than for professional academics but not impossible. Learning TeX will help because many journals want LaTex submissions. Most background information is available online if you search for it. You can join polymath projects, use mathoverflow etc

There are some advantages of working outside the system. You dont have to go around pleasing the people who might offer positions and you can work on what you want rather than what a math department or funding agency wants. So enjoy it as a hobby while earning a proper salary.

Update: I will add a little more specific advice. If you were doing a doctorate in a university you would have a wise old supervisor who would make sure you are heading in the right direction. If you want to work outside academia there is a danger of getting on a track that has no hope of success. Do not fall into the trap of thinking you can tackle a well known unsolved problem directly. This is a mistake very frequently made by outsiders.

It is better to start on simpler problems that you can handle and use them to build up expertise even if they are not of much interest to others. One way to find such problems is to start from a well-known one but then generalise it in some novel way to a bigger class of problems. Then look for special cases that can be solved and then generalise your solutions to solve a wider class of cases.

Finally, use your skills as a programmer to find solutions of interesting problems and then look for patterns. When you find patterns, make conjectures from them that you may then be able to prove. Try solving the problems at https://projecteuler.net/ to perfect your algorithm skills


How detailed should PhD proposal component of a PhD application be? Some of the PhD positions I'm applying for (all in Europe, mostly UK, Germany, and Switzerland), require a research proposal as a mandatory part of the application. I'm confused about what exactly they are asking for because the guidelines are quite vague.

I've seen this question and this one, but there are two things that are different in my case: First, the proposal for some of these programs is actually a mandatory requirement for the formal application (not for the first contact with the potential advisor), and second, unlike the former of those two questions, my field is mathematical and computational science, not Social Science (not sure if that makes a significant difference). I've also seen this question, but the question and the answers are not about how detailed the proposal should be.

My broader research interests, including a somewhat narrow area of interest for my PhD thesis (but not as narrow as a research topic), are already stated in both my statement letter (for formal application) and my contact with the potential advisor. That makes me think the proposal they expect to receive shouldn't be just my research interests, at least for those programs where, according to the guideline, it is recommended to cite related literature in my proposal. On the other hand, I really can't state a question that would be a suitable driving question for a PhD project on my own without enough help from a professor at this stage, and even if I could, I highly doubt that would be something my prospective advisor would want me to work on. So, it seems to me that writing a proper research proposal, without a substantial contribution from the advisor is impractical. (In fact, I can't even imagine how I could write about "the methodology" at this stage, considering finding the appropriate methodology in this field is often actually a very substantial part of the project.)

I'd appreciate if you could share your knowledge and experience about writing a PhD proposal as a part of the application. It would be very helpful to know what admission committees expect to see in a research proposal at the application stage, and how broad could the proposal be without turning into an SOP.

Yes indeed, I think it is expected that you would first contact the prospective advisor more informally and at minimum get an idea about the potential topics they would be interested in and that would fit with their existing research and the plans they have for the future. It's nearly impossible to guess this as an outsider.

In my case, in Germany and in CS, I had to write this for applying to the funding rather than the PhD position per se (which can be given out with almost no process by the prof). I first sat down with the prof and we talked things over and he agreed to take me on if I could acquire funding. Together with my prospective advisor and the post-doc who would be supervising me on the daily, I then wrote about 10 pages, with a detailed plan of the work I would be doing, including a gantt chart of tasks etc. Definitely not the kind of thing I would've been able to produce on my own.

I also went partway through an application process for a British university, where I had two skype interviews with the prof discussing his research before he told me to sit down and write a draft for the research plan for the formal application and send it to him for comments before submitting. (I ended up accepting another offer before I finished the draft, so I don't know what precisely they would have been looking for there.)


Why does a copy editor count the number of characters on a line? I got my paper back with remarks of the copy editor. One annotation counts the number of characters in a line. I have been told to ignore it, but I am still interested to know what it is for.

On the bottom of the page, the copy editor wrote: "73 × 39 × 27 → 25p.". 73 is the number of characters, 27 is the number of pages of my manuscript. 39 is the number of lines per page minus 1. It seems to be a calculation for the final number of pages (judging from the "p.") but I don't see how that figure would be calculated by multiplying these values.

I am using a template provided by the journal.

73 x 39 x 27 would give an estimate of the total number of characters in your manuscript.  They presumably have some standard estimate for the number of characters that fit on one page in the final format, and they've divided by that number (not shown) to get 25 pages.

I can't think of a good reason to subtract 1 from the number of lines per page (unless one line is obviously a header or something) so I'd wonder if they just miscounted.


I attended an Olympiad for student and failed. How should I write this down on my CV? When I was a freshman in the university, I was a member of my university Olympiad team to compete on the Student Physics Olympiad. And I failed to get a single medal. Although the results weren't good, the fact that I had a chance to go to the competition is one of my competitive points. How can I write that down on my CV?

Firstly, you did not 'fail' - you were part of a team and competed - so congratulations on that.

Secondly, it can't hurt to include an entry in you CV under a heading like 'Other Achievements', something along the lines of:

  (Year), Competed as part of (Team) for the Student Physics Olympiad.

If you have space, briefly describe positive aspects of your participation.


Are young researchers at various universities held to the same standard? Let's say that Candidate A is at University X, working in the same field as Candidate B, who is at University Y. University Y has lots of faculty working in that area, and an active seminar. Candidate A collaborates with one other faculty member at University X. All the top mathematicians regularly give talks at University Y, which is considered top 5 in that area of academia. Candidate A is hard-working and  just as driven as Candidate B but doesn't get to interact with scholars as much as Candidate B. Candidate B has an easier time with research than Candidate A as a result, and publishes more papers of better quality than Candidate A.

When hiring committees or program directors judge Candidates A and B, Candidate B comes across as better, although Candidate B had a lot more advantages. Are those advantages considered when it comes to getting grants or job interviews? Or is it basically a losing battle for Candidate A?

I don't think you are asking the question that you think you are. If you are asking whether the two will be treated equally in the hiring process only then the answer is that the B probably has an advantage in any situation in which they are the only two candidates and all other things are equal. But all other things probably aren't equal, even including personality and flexibility.

Also, it is entirely possible that A has written an especially strong dissertation and has a great record otherwise, while B has been allowed to coast along a bit in the shadow of the senior faculty.

Also, candidate B can't hold "every" position, so once they (maybe) grab the plum job all the others are still open. And as stated above, the "plum" candidate may turn out to be a "prune" instead.

I assume you ask this because you think you are more like A than B. Otherwise I don't see you asking the question. Like anyone, you need to make your best case for success in anything you apply for. Do the work and make it count. Then you will be taken seriously, even if B is still lurking.

But the title question is different, since you said "at the various..". There the answer would be probably not as what is typical treatment at one place probably varies quite a bit from others, except in the most generalized terms, such as time to tenure. If you meant "from the various..." instead, then ignore this note.


How is the job market for Chemistry like? Apologies if this isn't a correct website to ask. But I'm a UK student applying to study Chemistry at university mostly because I'm good at the subject and I enjoy learning the applications of what it can bring to us in the future like nanotechnology. I applied to UCL (Chemistry with Managment), Durham, Manchester, Bath and Warwick. I intend to get into a career in finance or IB possibly but not too sure yet.

I've recently decided to take a year off to see what I actually want to do with life and also just to relax after being burnt out over countless times and travel.

I think most of my problem is because of the fact that I take other people into account of chemistry and not just block them off.

So I just want to know what I can do with a Chemistry degree?

Subscribe to your local job portal. It'll tell you more about what jobs are out there than most people can. Using Google for the term "uk job portal", I found these two sites: jobsite.co.uk and reed.co.uk (there are a lot of others). Search for positions requiring chemistry at your degree level (e.g. if you're applying for a PhD position, search for "PhD chemistry"). These job portals usually have lots of refine search options as well, such as sorting by location, salary, and so on.

I'd recommend subscribing and staying subscribed to these job alerts throughout your studies. Even if you never apply, at least you know what's out there, in case there's a change in market trends.


Should I mention not completing a Phd in a cover letter? I am possibly quitting my PhD. I am 2 years into my PhD and now I am writing a cover letter for an opening at a company. My question is, do I mention in the cover letter why I am quitting ? In my CV I just mention what I've done for the past two years and write that the PhD is not complete.

I feel like I need to mention it, because it feels like an elephant in the room. Also to avoid confusion I think I need to mention it. (e.g. They can think I tend to continue working on the PhD while I want to work there).

Yes. They are going to see it in your CV anyway and if you say nothing, it just looks like you are trying to hide something and they are going to assume the worst. I would tell them the reasons why I quit (e.g. what to do something applied, ...).


Is MRes after MSc redundant to get to PhD? I recently finished a MSc and I was looking for a PhD. I noticed that some positions offer a PhD only through a MRes of 1-2 years, for a total of 4 years.

Does it make sense applying for another master or is it just redundant?

The MRes degree teaches you the basics of how to conduct research and use research methods according to your chosen field. Depending on the field you select, you use different types of research methods and you get a chance to put them in practice. If you choose to do the MRes degree, it will be considered a higher degree than a taught or research based MSc degree, but lower than the MPhil. The MRes would be seen as a good foundation for you to progress to a PhD and produce original output using the research methods that you have learned during your MRes degree.

As an example, in Computer Science, you only need a 1st class honours bachelors to get into the PhD route and you learn which research method you will use whilst on the PhD route.


How to get an advisor for my amateur research? I'm about to embark on a research project in complex systems on my own spare time. It seems like the idea I have is a good one. However, it would be better, for obvious reasons, to have an experienced person guide me. What are the chances that a university professor would agree to guide me while I try and churn this out? (Obviously, I want it to be as professional as possible).

If I don't get anyone on board, what are my chances of publishing, or at least getting a pat on the back from admissions committees when I apply for graduate school? Do they appreciate this kind of thing?

You've mentioned that you intend to apply to grad school.  It would be helpful to know where you are in the academic process: high school, started university, finished university?
Regarding asking for help, I see two distinct phases:

If you have not yet started the project (and you are not currently a student somewhere), then I think most professors and professional researchers would be very wary to spend any time helping you.  Complex systems, is, in particular, a field that attracts a lot of crackpots, and even the most well-intentioned projects of interested amateurs usually fizzle.  I think the best bet would be to find someone you already know to provide early consultation, rather than cold-calling a professional at this stage.
If you are enrolled in a university of some kind, then the story is different: the faculty has something of an obligation to talk to eager students. (-:

If you have already made significant progress and have specific technical questions, I think almost anyone would be wiling to help.

One other piece of advice: don't worry too much about talking about your idea.  Many 'amateurs' get obsessed with the secrecy of their amazing idea -- this is the road to crackpotdom.  I think it would be quite reasonable to state your idea on a site such as mathoverflow and ask whether it is a credible research proposal.
If you can cite recent publications in refereed journals that indicate active interest in the area of your proposed work, then this is a good sign that you have both done your homework and identified an interesting subject of investigation.
That said, even if the thing you are investigating turns out to be interesting only to you, it could still be worth continuing.  It might lead somewhere more interesting later, and you would certainly develop useful skills in the process.

If I don't get anyone on board, what are my chances of publishing, or at least getting a pat on the back from admissions committees when I apply for graduate school? Do they appreciate this kind of thing?

A successful independent project, especially one resulting in a publication, would be great material for your grad school app.   If your project does have interesting results, it should not be too hard to publish, regardless of your credentials.
Even if it turns out that your work is not publishable in a refereed journal, it might find a home in your school's "journal of undergraduate research" (or something similar), which would also be a nice resume bullet during the grad school application procedure.
Finally, it's probably best to simply avoid the word "amateur".


Page references for "far away" figures, equations, tables, etc I am currently writing my master's thesis, which contains a lot of equations and figures referred to in the text of the report. I use Latex for my writing thus making it easy to refer to the figure/equation numbers, but it is also possible to refer to the page on which the figure/equation is to be found. For instance I might have some text on page 34 saying:

  ... which is shown in figure 2.1 on page 5.

or with shorter distance (page-wise):

  ... as seen in figure 3.2 on the following page.

My question is whether this is useful to the reader. Is there any consensus about how/when to refer to the pages? Is it better not to do it?

If the distance between the figure and the paragraph that mentions it is only about one page, such an aid would be overkill, but for longer distances, I would perceive it as useful.

If the distance is very long, you might even consider repeating the same figure, or some excerpt of it, near the paragraph where you refer to it.


When/whether to do pre-submission inquiry at high impact journals I'm curious to hear whether there is general guidance on when and whether to submit a pre-submission inquiry to a high impact journal (field: biology). Our goal is to identify a journal that will send our paper out for review. I understand pre-submissions are best when there really is a question of appropriateness, e.g., you are submitting a software-oriented manuscript to an experimental biology journal.

I am less clear on whether the current situation will benefit from a pre-submission inquiry. Consulting with my PI, and other faculty on the floor, there seems to be wide disagreements about the utility of pre-submission. Some argue these inquiries are more efficient than full submissions, since formatting a paper for each journal is usually time intensive. Others say they've had pre-submissions meet strong approval, then get editorially rejected. Any general thoughts on this?

Edit 6.27.15.
I'd like to specifically highlight bitwise' comment below as that has proven to be the most useful advice. In the last 9 months I've submitted multiple articles not fulfilling the exact formatting requirements, length limits, supplement guidelines, and even figure guidelines, and this has not seemed to affect whether we get reviewed. One paper is currently under review at Molecular Cell that is 4000 characters over limit and has a wildly incorrectly formatted supplement, and 1 figure over the limit.

I have never found a pre-submission inquiry to be useful, and was always advised against it. The main argument is that it does not increase your chances of acceptance and just adds another hurdle to pass. Additionally, assuming you use a reference manager the difference in formatting between journals is usually minimal (or you can ignore some of the rules on your first submission).

However, I always submitted to journals that I know and read before, so I knew that the topic is generally appropriate. I would only consider a pre-submission inquiry if I am not sure whether the general topic is appropriate for the journal.


CS paper rejected for lack of technical contribution; what does this mean, and how can I fix it? I recently got two papers rejected with the reviewers asserting a lack of technical contribution. They contained good ideas, at least in my eyes, and used common methodologies in the experimentation. So my question related to the CS field is, what is the difference between a good idea that was tested and a technical contribution? What should an idea have to become a technical contribution?

Another observation I had is that other papers, that got accepted, were actually worse from the research methodologies and were previously published in similar form (so the idea was not very original) at that conference, so the “contribution” of these papers is much lower than mine would have been (again it’s just from my perspective). So I don’t understand why those papers got accepted and if the reviewer’s decisions actually make sense, what is it that makes such papers accepted? I aim at enhancing my now rejected papers because I still think they contain original ideas that should be published, I just don’t know where to start.

Since you ask those questions, I assume you are relatively new to CS research. I do not know if you have previous research experience in any other scientific area, but let's assume you are new to research all together. Correct me if I am wrong.

When your paper gets rejected, the feeling of rejection sucks. It sucks a lot. But in research you have to deal with this rejection and move-on. It does not matter if other people's works that you consider worse have been accepted. Maybe they are better than yours maybe not. But that is really irrelevant. Focus on your work and how to improve it.

The questions you should be asking:

Is this problem you are trying to solve interesting?
Is your solution substantially better than previous state-of-the-art?
Are you certain that you described related and recent literature thoroughly? Are you up-to-date on related literature?
Did you make clear the benefits on your approach?
Is your paper well presented  and written? Have you explained your approach thoroughly (with pseudocode, figures) and not just with words?
Were your experiments thorough? Did you use many datasets for your experiments? Have you used the datasets that the related papers use or at least similar if not bigger in size and scope? Have you compared your results with previous approaches? Have you many charts demonstrating the various aspects of your solution?
Have you advertised your work by finding many test-cases for your problem?

If any of those answer is NO, then you must turn them to YES, before resubmitting your work. You must understand that if your paper or the problem you try to solve is boring, then it gets rejected. It is as simple as that. In that cases, the most usual reason for rejection is "not enough contribution". So, probably it is also your presentation that needs to be fixed.

Also, it seems rather strange that although you are probably new to research, you have submitted two papers at the same time. Perhaps this is too ambitious and it would be better to focus on one of them, improve it and resubmit it. Perhaps, they should be sent to different venues that are more tailored for each one of them.

And last but not least. Do not worry. It gets better with time. Both the way you handle rejection and the way you write papers. So, improve what needs to be fixed and everything will work out.


What is the legal status of an open access academic publication? I'm interested in the legal status of a published academic open access product. Is it considered a commercial product or not, even if published by a company that usually earns money (in one way or another) with academic publications?

I'm asking regarding the use of images that are free to use in a noncommercial context but would not be available for commercial products.

I'm aware that it would be appropiate to contact the creators of the images and get relevant permissions but specifically I would like to know what the legal status of an open access academic publication is. Is it still considered to be a commercial product?

Qualifying a paper as open-access only indicates that the paper can be legally accessed free of charge by anyone. It does not make any further implication regarding its license. E.g., some license will allow the use of images in a commercial context, some will not. More details: Gratis versus libre.


Does the talk count as invited if my PI invited me? I'm a just-graduated undergraduate in Biology/Bioinformatics.

In a month or so, I'll get to give a short (10-minute) talk at a major conference during one of a handful (5?) 50-minute workshops (I'm so excited!).

The other 4 speakers were invited to talk by my principal investigator. He also invited me to give a talk. My PI applied to give the workshop—it’s a competitive proposal-based thing, I think.

I'll be applying to graduate school in a couple of months and plan to list the talk on my CV.

I guess it's officially an invited talk (by the criteria here and here, at least), but that feels somewhat contrived since it's my PI who invited me.

Should I go ahead and list it as an "invited talk" on my CV, or would "contributing talk" be more honest?

Thanks!

Since you have graduated already I would say that it is perfectly fine to list it as "invited". If the other speakers are able to do so, then you should also. This is especially the case since your use of the CV is for graduate school admission, not some later career stage purpose.

It might be a bit presumptuous to list a ten minute talk as an invited talk if you had just earned a doctorate with this professor, but for someone in your position it is an honor to be asked, even for such a short talk. I'll guess that few such BA/BS students are in a similar position.

However, while the "invited" part seems fine to me, you might want to take care about how you state the rest of the description. "Invited talk" might imply more than you intend. "Invited short talk" or "Invited workshop presentation" might be more accurate. I assume you don't have a lot of these requiring a general description for a section of your CV.

Your advisor had options about who to invite. He wasn't obligated to invite you and trusts that you have something to offer.

However, since he will be writing you letters of recommendation for grad school, I assume, you can ask him what is best here.


What should I do if I have accepted an offer informally but am denied the job? This is a follow up to my other question.

In November last year I accepted an informal offer of a position at a university outside my country of residence. Since then, I have in good faith withdrawn all my other applications and stopped applying elsewhere as I understood that my acceptance of the offer was binding.

I have now applied for the job formally as they told me to. Recently I enquired about the status and according to them the evaluation of applications will be concluded next week and I was also told that I am in a very good position.

I know now that I should avoid this kind of practice, but I am in it already, and what I fear finally comes. Does 'a very good position' mean that there is a possibility that I will not get the job? What should I do if it turns out that I do not get the job in the end? Can I even start applying for other jobs now or should I wait till next week? The problem is that my current contract ends this month and I have to leave the country next month. I have a family to feed and to provide a home for.

The following is added after the first two answers below are posted:

Although the position was not yet advertised before I accepted the offer, I had always thought that this was a real offer, since they already said things like they were looking forward to welcoming me in the group and that they would get in touch with me to finalise my contract (all this was said in writing).

I guess my question is, is there nothing I can do with all the email correspondences in which the promise and my acceptance of the job were all recorded? From the answers already given below, it seems that there is nothing I could do with it except to learn not to make the same mistake again. But then, can the university just walk away like that?

Of course all this is still hypothetical, and hopefully I still get the job as promised, but I would appreciate if someone who has been in the same situation could share his/her experience and how they dealt with it, just in case.

Update: The university in question has lived up to their promise and I have now been formally offered the position.

I think the other answer is decent, but OP seems to think that his/her question is not being addressed, so here goes:

  What should I do if I have accepted an offer informally but am denied the job?

Apply to other jobs, of course.

  Does 'a very good position' mean that there is a possibility that I will not get the job?

Anything is possible until you receive and accept a formal offer of employment.

  What should I do if it turns out that I do not get the job in the end?

Forget about that opportunity and start applying for other positions.

  Can I even start applying for other jobs now or should I wait till next week?

You can/should be applying/interviewing for other opportunities until you have obtained and accepted a formal offer.


Is it appropriate to put conference volunteering on a CV? From reading the many questions on here that relate to CVs it seems that some items are necessary on a CV and others are more appropriate at the persons difference stages within academia. As someone at the very early stage, masters student with no publications, is conference volunteering a plus or minus on a CV?

In my own situation I helped out at a 2 day conference that my department held. I assisted presenters with setting up their presentations and video recorded the conference for the university. As a smaller conference I was the only grad student that assisted.

As a general rule: anything which is clearly academically related can go on your CV.  As you say, there are certain things that are required or nearly required on your CV, but even these vary by discipline and sometimes people in the same discipline have divergent ideas.  (For instance, every once in a while I find a CV which doesn't list the candidate's undergraduate institution, or lists it without indicating the years that they spent there.  I would have thought that was strictly required.  I guess I was wrong.)

What to fight in adding "academically related" information to your CV is clear: if you put in too much routine stuff, you'll get a bloated mess of a CV that few people will actually read.  Drawbacks of a lengthy CV can be mitigated by very careful and clear organization.  Nevertheless, you can compare CVs of two absolutely cognate people -- e.g. who attended undergrad and grad at exactly the same time and arrived at their current institution at the same time and with the same seniority -- and you'll find significant variations, including up to at least 1/3 in the total length.  It's really your choice how much detail to put on your CV, and I would be skeptical of anyone who tells you too stridently what you must and must not do.

Having said that: yes, very early career academics (especially students) really struggle to have a CV that doesn't look unhelpfully skimpy.  Conference work sounds like a great thing to put on a junior person's CV -- and in fact, even on a senior person's, although a more senior person might be more selective about the kind of conference work that goes on your CV.

One tip: "conference volunteering" might be an undersell.  Most conference organizing is unpaid, hence is volunteer work.  "Conference assistant" sounds like your work was really on the level of secretarial work / technical support.  If that is an accurate description of what you did, great.  If you do such things more than once or twice, you should think about asking to be let in on some of the more content-related aspects of the work.  For instance, if you had a say -- however small -- in choosing or recruiting the speakers or attendees, then I would go for something like "co-organizer" rather than "assistant".


Should I ask my professor to change my project group? I am a grad student.

I am taking a course wherein we were asked to do a group project. I asked around a few people but people seemed "paired up". I found a group of two people willing to take me in.

First few days it was fine. Then the presentation came by, one member vanished and the other one "deleted" the slides he was supposed to discuss, made up an excuse, and in the end I ended up giving the presentation. The person was also controlling the slides while I was talking and at a point pretended that he couldn't move the cursor as the system hung up. We had to abort the presentation then. Moments later, another person came to help us out and as it turns out the system was perfectly fine. The guy only did that to sabotage my presentation. Why would he do that? Also the person who actually didn't show up got to the presentation last moment and started talking about it as if they knew everything about it(they made some wrong facts).

Its only later I found out that the aforementioned person (ppt killer ) is actually a really dishonest person (fabricated data due to which was kicked out of his phD program, got a masters instead and will be allowed to graduate sooner) and the other person is chums with him. Now we're working on something only I'm knowledgable about because of my previous work in the field (they are completely relying on my expertise, even the project title and content was chosen by me). This weekend we were supposed to have a meeting, just before the meeting I sent a paper which would form the crux of the whole project. After making it to the place, no one showed up and they suddenly made up excuses of not being able to make it.

I feel cheated, like they're only using me for my knowledge and excluding me out of all the real discussions and work for the project.

Should I ask the professor to change my group? As its still early on. Is this the right thing to do? Crossing those two seems bad, they look like the department "shitmouths" to me, always engaged in the latest gossip. What should I say to the prof, please give me some advice.

Thanks.

I can give you some advice based on similar group dynamics I had.

While working in one of my thesis courses in industrial engineering/quality, I was paired up with a group that was fairly cohesive from the beginning. All, except one member, really made the effort to try on this project.

The one member, a gal, was not culturally and academically on the same page as us. I had her in a previous class and was known to cheat and probe for answers. It also showed she happened to be a bit crazy.

About a fourth of the way of our semester-long project, she went rouge and stopped showing up to our meetings, which in turn led to a lack of quality work, then a lack of work all-together. Come time for one of our presentations, we had clipped her powerpoint chart which had no meaning to our project and presented in front of the class. She immediately started presenting slides that weren't hers unannounced, obviously looking as if we were unprepared. We got an email, CC'ing the professor stating how we were "(explicit) this and (explicit) that for deleting her slide prior to the presentation."

Rather than confronting the issue, we built a case, with screenshots, email threads, and evidence proving she was not contributing any work. Solution? Present the evidence to the professor and have them facilitate the discussion. Chances are they'll ask you to stick it out but may be lenient on grading you.

With the professor there, we were able to have the tough discussion and bring it up to them because chances are your group member's poor character has also rubbed off on the professor. You'd be surprised to find out what your professor is thinking.

tl;dr version, come to your professor with concrete evidence on why this is happening, and see what options there are. The point of group projects in college are not to work with your friends, but rather be able to make difficult decisions with individuals you may not see eye to eye with.

I"m positive after this experience, you'll be able to cope working with people you don't necessarily agree with, morally or otherwise. My recommendation, finish off the project with poise and build a case against your bad apples so they'll be barred from ruining another perfectly functional group project.

Best of luck.


What do PhD programs, specifically finance and Econ programs, look for in research experience? I believe I have the pre-requisite GPA, GRE, tough classes, etc. to get in to a top PhD program in finance or economics. What I believe I am missing is the research experience.

What are these top programs looking for in the research arena, it's not exactly listed on their sites?

Is faculty supervised research experience a must have for a top 10 program? Or will independent research suffice?

If you have basically perfect attributes in the other metrics, does research experience matter too much?

This probably depends a lot on your definition of "top."

To get a sense for what successful applicants look like, check the websites, CVs, and/or LinkedIn profiles of current students in the programs you are interested in. (Look at their history from before they entered the program, of course.)

For example, I looked up the list of current econ PhD students at NYU Stern and started Googling. All the ones I checked (the first five names or so currently on that list) had some kind of formal research experience prior to joining the program.