Would an international student A in the US helping another international student B in Europe cheating be punished by US university? I have a quick question about a hypothetical situation:
An international student A in the US helped another international student B in the Europe finish the entire several homework assignments and an entire final exam. And now, the A has every evidence and chat files, and he wants to report the non-compliance of code of integrity to the European university of student B.
Would student A be punished since he helped student B finish the homework and exam? In this case, student A did not violate any discipline of his university in the US and the laws of the United States. Would student A still be punished by his university or by the law of US?

You seem to assume that the academic honesty rules at a university will always stipulate that dishonesty only counts as being against the rules if it occurs at that university.  That is a dangerous supposition to make.  Many universities have academic misconduct policies that refer broadly to collusion, cheating, and other forms of misconduct, without stipulation that the misconduct must occur in relation to an assessment at that university.  In such cases, there would be a genuine argument over the proper scope of the policy, and whether it may apply to instances of misconduct in relation to assessments at another university.
Just to give you an example of this, here is the present Academic Misconduct Rule at my University.  Section 6 of the policy provides that "It is academic misconduct if a student: (a) in relation to an assessment: (i) cheats; ... (iii) improperly colludes with another person; or (iv) acts, or assists another person to act, dishonestly or unfairly in or in connection with an examination...".  While the policy certainly only applies to students enrolled at my University, you can see that it does not specify that the assessment in question must be an assessment at the University.  Likewise, Section 2 of the policy, which sets its scope, provides that "This instrument applies to all students of the University."  Again, observe that it does not specify that the instrument applies only with respect to acts undertaking in relation to assessments and other matters at the University.
If student A were a student at my University (subject to the linked rules), I think there is a reasonable chance that his actions here would be considered to be a breach of this policy.  The student would of course have an opportunity to argue over whether the policy applies to an assessment at another university, and they would probably argue that this should be implied, irrespective of the specified scope.  Perhaps they would convince the academic misconduct committee of this (such that their conduct is considered out-of-scope) or perhaps they would not.  I would think that most academic staff would be concerned about this behaviour, and would be reluctant to consider it out-of-scope.


Which quantitative metrics are there of the quality and prestige of journals, and how do they compare? I have seen several different metrics that are applied for ranking journals: Impact Factor, SJR, and H-index.  Which of these is the most useful and robust for comparisons with respect to the quality and prestige of journals?

In short:

Impact factor is the traditional measure of mean citations per year shortly after publication.  It can refer to either the official Thomson-Reuters computation (which has lots of problems), or other competing similar computations.
SJR attempts to improve on impact factor by using an algorithm like PageRank to more heavily weight citations from "better" publication venues.
H-index for journals is just the same as for people, essentially looking for the volume of consistently good work.  The only large place I know of that applies this to journals is Google Scholar metrics.

All of these are subject to manipulation and gaming, all are highly field-dependent, and none are very good actual ratings of quality.  Still, they can be used to get a rough sense of the significance of a venue that you are unfamiliar with.


Is it ethical to award points for hilariously bad answers? Q: Why are the outer planets of the Solar System so much more massive than the inner planets?
A: By the central limit theorem, everything eventually appears to look like a Bell curve. Therefore planet masses increase with distance to the Sun before decreasing, and the planets at the end of the distribution (Mercury & Pluto) have small masses while the planets in the middle (Jupiter) have large masses.

One doesn't need to know anything about astronomy or planetary formation to know this answer is nonsense.  Furthermore, the student should have known that Pluto isn't a planet (Mars is also less massive than both the Earth and Jupiter, and Neptune is more massive than Uranus as well, breaking the trend).
On the other hand, it's funny nonsense. Funny nonsense has gotten immortalized as internet jokes, and if the joke is to be believed, even led to an 'A' for the student. There's even a journal for funny research.
Is it ethical to award a few points for this answer?

Is it ethical to award a few points for this answer?

No.
It does not demonstrate understanding. If I wrote a good-intentioned, but poor answer and got the same amount of points, I'd be peeved.


Does Mathematics research in proven problems have any importance? This is my first post in this community, please excuse me if this kind of post is inappropriate.

I completed my second year of my Bachelor's Degree in Mathematics (where I study, all Bachelor's Degrees are a 3 year course, unlike in USA).
I have asked one of my Professors to organize a Mathematics Research Internship for which I wouldn't get paid, as I just wanted to get into the world of research and improve my level of math, and hopefully get some experience in research.

As I am working towards the end of it, I am starting to wonder if this Internship will have any credibility or a positive effect on my CV once I apply to a Master's Degree program (I don't think anyone will look at what I am doing now when I apply to a PhD program). What provokes such doubts in me is the fact that I am doing "pseudo-research", basically I am trying to prove some properties that have been proved long ago. Most of the stuff that I proved can be most likely found in graduate Mathematics text books. I think that whoever will be studying my CV will have doubts about my credibility.

So my question, how will my internship's "scientific report" look (basically a presentation of what I have done, all the proofs and all the application I have done)?

It is not going look bad at all. It sounds like the Professor has given you a project that is achievable in the time frame, and satisfies your goals of improving your math and getting some experience in research. It should have a positive effect both on your CV and on your understanding of the research process.

In my PhD experience, much of the beginning was is exploring the topic, reading the literature, and trying to figure out a new direction. This can take many months, and can even change as your understanding improves or new information comes to light.

I don't think people will expect to see original research on new problems until the latter stages of your PhD.


got a TAship award- is it a difficult task i am awarded TAship to fund my phd studies although i know TA roles and responsibilities and actually quite excited to carry out these tasks but on the other hand i am dreading a little that what if i can't manage my duties along with my PhD studies and start doubting myself, which is wrong. so is it really tough that you can't manage it along with your coursework especially when you have never done this before? i would appreciate any advice from someone who have experience in TAing. Thanks

Having spent over 6 years in grad school TA'ing and teaching my own classes, I will say that you will enjoy it a lot. Teaching gives benefits that are more valuable than the funding it brings -- funding in itself is great, of course! I think one learns the best when they teach a subject. Having less time for your own work, you get much better in time management. Teaching also allows one to get experienced in public speaking, refine their skills in communicating knowledge, strategizing among many other positive things. So congratulations!


Position in mathematics after Ph.D. with publications but without recommendation letters and teaching experience Let's say that some person has a Ph.D. in mathematics and several publications in peer-reviewed journals. After that he worked several years in another field (not directly related to mathematics). Now he is thinking about returning to mathematics. The downside is that:

he doesn't have any teaching experience, and
he can't arrange for any recommendation letters (I am not going to explain why, let's just consider it as a given for the purpose of this question).

All mathematics postdoc position announcements that I've seen so far require recommendation letters, and the vast majority of them require teaching experience. Do you know of any postdoc positions in mathematics that would make an exception?

Also, are there any other positions (in the private sector) related to mathematics that you would suggest to look for in this situation?

I can't imagine taking on someone who wasn't able to provide any recommendation letters, even if the candidate had several Science and Nature papers. However, I would be happy to consider strong recommendation letters from an employer in another field in combination with a very strong publication record.


Should I add E-books and Blog Posts to my CV? I am still planning to get into a Master's program sometime in the fall next year.  Should I add my E-books and Blog Posts to my CV?

I keep my blog posts formal and educational.  The following is a link to my blog: http://cybersecwise.com/wordpress/. I do already know people reviewing my CV will not actually read my blog.

I have also written two E-books.  One is called "NoSQL Injection for Elasticsearch", which was referenced in a Russian Defcon (Hacker Convention).  Since it was referenced in a defcon, does that count as Peer Reviewed?  The other E-book is called "Introduction to Web Hacking: Cross-site Scripting".

These things are all computer security related, but I am actually going to go for a Master's in Computer Science.

I would include them in a section titled "community engagement" or something of that flavor.

Note that something being cited is not equivalent to peer-review, do not classify the work as peer-reviewed.


Second PhD vs PostDoc - Math vs Theoretical Physics I'm about to complete my PhD in mathematics. I've been working with Group theory (Representations). Besides the PhD I also did a master's in theoretical physics (I took much more courses than necessary to earn the degree and all of them were in advanced level, and did really well). The thing is: I would like to work in Theoretical Physics, and I'd like to use my Math background and apply it to theoretical physics. I love both subjects and I think they are like brothers in a sense. So my question is:

1) Should I apply for a second PhD (In physics)? For me it would be the worst option, since I'd have to spent a lot of time in things that I already know, and I don't see the point of writing another thesis. I heard that in Europe some universities "hire" PhD students as Research Assistants, so maybe this wouldn't be so bad. What you think?

2) Apply for a PostDoc position in theoretical physics? This is the best option in my opnion, but I don't know if physics departments welcomes mathematicians applying for PostDocs positions, Do they?

Observe that this question is not answered in another post, my question is specific to math/theoretical physics research. Besides I'm not thinking in getting a second PhD to "learn" physics, I am asking about what is more reasonable when considering to do research both in math and in physics.

Anyone will hire you provided you can convince them you are better than the other candidates. You already have a PhD in Maths, you have to show them you have the skills and knowledge to complement their baggage and help solve their problems.

In the Mathematical Physics department in my undergrad university (Spain), there is at least one postdoc that is mathematician with a PhD in Economy, and two physicist readerers that works in Applied Mathematics.


How should I state my masters degree in my CV if I finished the program, but the ceremony won't be held for several months? I'm currently updating my CV because recently I finished a master program. although the ceremony is going to be on March, I don't have the diploma yet. How should I state this in my CV?

Find out from the university when the degree is conferred. This may be before or after the ceremony (it could be already conferred). (Also see: What date should I use for graduation?)

If the degree has already been conferred, you can write that you have a masters degree (the ceremony is irrelevant).
If it hasn't, write that you have completed the degree requirements, and expect the degree to be conferred on X date.


Is it illegal or unethical for a publishing company to pay in exchange for including a co-author? Some weeks ago a company contacted me via email. In summary, they offer to pay you if you include a co-author. They also need you to sign an agreement with your University and them. So, from one side, it seems kind of legal (since in the agreement they state "sponsorship"), but from the other side, these practices, I am afraid could lead to unexpected retractions, due to the likely unethical side of the business.

Is this kind of service illegal or unethical?

It sounds not ethical to me; if it is legal or not you should ask a lawyer;

Consider the following point: This is definitely at least borderline to scientific misconduct (depending if the co-author actually contributed anything at all), and either you will have to publish in a journal with bad reputation or risk retraction if you publish in any journal caring about it's reputation.

And if your PHD gets delayed (and possibly stalls as a consequence of resulting bad relationships with your team/university), anything which you possibly got from it will turn out not to be worth it.

(As a small side remark: Academic life often forces you to walk the line between ethical and not ethical very carefully. But don't participate in anything like this on your own will)


I want to do research in A about its applications in B. Don't know exactly what people in B need from A. What's a good way to acquire this knowledge? Issues related to climate change, mitigating it and making humans deal better with its negative consequences are super important to me. I am not an environmental scientist though - I'm an engineer. I have a varied background and experience, which fits in well with a discipline I'm very interested in - robotics. I feel like pursuing a PhD in robotics, researching its application in environmental science would be good for me and for the field(s).

Now, the problem is I don't know the exact problems (in environmental science) that I could propose to work on in my research proposals. I really want to have a conversation with someone in the field about this, but I don't know how to go about this. I'm one year out of school now, so it's not like I can swing by a relevant professor's office and drop in for a chat. On the other hand sending a "cold-call" email also seems not fully appropriate, because asking "What kinds of problems do you have that can be solved by technology?" seems far too general.

So the question is - what is a good way to acquire this kind of knowledge?

You don't know what they need and they don't know what you can offer. One of you has to give and start getting hands dirty in the other's field. And in this case you'll probably have to do that. Here are some possibilities. I study in the US so there could be some cultural/practical differences, but I would like to believe that they should not be big, if any.

Go to some university research seminars. Most of them are open to public and schedules are often posted online. Stay and chat with the presenter.
Take a few introductory classes. This allows you to acquire proper lingoes to communicate. If possible, I'd also suggest taking it for credit because later when you do your PhD, the issue of not having any coursework in this new area will come up. Some programs allow 1-2 credits transfer so you may be able to hit two birds with one stone.
Identify prominent research organizations in this area. For example, internationally there is IPCC, and in the US there is EPA. These organizations periodically produce evidence-based statements and reports, in which you can glean important research needs.
Regularly do some brief literature surveys in this area and perhaps even the combined area. Sign up for customizable article alert. Pay attention to the studies' limitations and applications. Take good notes and review them time to time when brainstorming.
Examine grant availability by visiting funding agency websites. In the US there is grants.gov and I'm sure there must be a UK or European equivalence. Look for related grant announcements. In most of these announcements, you'll often find problem statements and suggested areas from which the agency would like to see some grant proposals. Having a research plan that appeals to your future supervisor and funding agencies can make your PhD journey a lot smoother.
In the above processes, also pay attention to who are the leading institutes and researchers in this field (or the combined field.) Consider contacting them for a short information interview (15-min or so.) Don't dread doing it because eventually you'll need a person in the env. sci. to be in your committee; might as well start scouting earlier.


Writing a letter of recommendation for your own, new grad student? I have a new PhD student who needs a rather large number of letters of recommendation for a fellowship.  Normally I would not agree to write such a letter without knowing the student for a longer period of time, but at this point she has exhausted her list of other potential letter writers and has no other good option.  Also, I do genuinely believe in this student's potential (otherwise I wouldn't have hired her!), and have had nothing but terrific experiences with her so far.

Question: How do I write a compelling letter, given that I have known this student for only a short amount of time (less than a year)?

Obviously the fellowship is remunerative for me as well, since I wouldn't have to pay her out of my own grants for a few years.  A cynic sitting on the review board might say, "of course the advisor wrote a good letter—they want the money!"  What kind of tangible information might help dissuade a person with this kind of attitude?

(For reference, the fellowship is a big federal graduate fellowship in the US.)

Several months, if you worked with the student, is plenty of time to get an informed impression, and especially so if your impression is good. This is how I would proceed:

Write how you know/met the student. Explain why/how your interaction developed. In your case, how did the student capture your attention, why you hired the student, what were the motives for this.

Then write facts. You say the student is terrific. What are the facts that support that? For instance, "the student solved a difficult problem in short time. The student very quickly understood the material you gave her to read. The student has produced a publication. The student is going to submit some research proposal earlier than expected. The student is extremely effective in running studies". Or, whatever is relevant in your case. At this stage, only list facts which are relevant to support the case of the student. If the student did not yet work with you, but you know the student from teaching her in class, you could go for "top 2 out of 50", "best coursework I have seen" or whatever is relevant there. Don't be tempted to write about things you do not know. If you have few, but promising, facts, limit yourself to state these and make them compelling.

In the next section, most references are expecting a few words outside of the concrete scientific facts, e.g. team work abilities, presentation skills, or something else of relevance that makes clear that the student has potential. Sometimes, hobbies are mentioned, but I typically make that dependent on whether it is relevant to the position/grant.

Now summarize your impression about the student, supported by the facts listed above. If you are delighted/looking forward to work with the student, do not hesitate to let that be known.

Of course, you would want the money - but, see it from the point of the funding agency: it is, of course, more likely to feel more confident giving the money to a student whose supervisor radiates the message that she is enthusiastic to work with that student. It is perfectly legitimate to support one's own student, and your reference will, of course, be completely open about that.


Similar work in same issue I wrote a tool to perform X. It was rejected by a journal as not novel. I wrote to the editor saying there is currently no tool to do X. They acknowledged this.

When the issue I was rejected from came out, it contained another tool which did X. I have not tried to republish my paper, but it is on the internet and has been posted to forums.

A) Should the editor have mentioned in my rejection that they were just about to publish a similar paper? This may have changed what I did (ie publish elsewhere)

The other paper said "there is currently no tool to do X". The author almost certainly didn't know about my tool/site.

B) Should the editor have suggested the paper cite my tool/website? Or at least not allowed the authors to say "there is no tool to do X"?

C) What should I do? Just give up on my paper?

Providing a novel tool is not necessarily novel per se and even with a novel tool you still might not qualify for the editorial line of the journal. But I can't say really with this information only

A - Usually reviewers do not have even knowledge of all the papers in a journal or conference. That means that if they rejected you for that, it's that the same reviewer reviewed both papers. Moreover, they should not have any ground to favor one tool over the other, since they are both unaware of the other, and they are both new. It usually is a good thing when 2 tools come out at the same time in the same journal, because it usually leads to a comparison paper :p
B - Other tool couldn't cite you since your paper was rejected. Maybe given them the website, but that's a gray area i think.
C - As a rule of thumb i don't give up on a paper I think it is interesting. If your tool is better than the other, then compare it in a paper (maybe conference rather than journal). If your tool is worse and you want to improve it, do so and be better, then compare it. If you don't really care, and only have a bruised ego from the rejection (yes, i know, it hurts...), you can give it up. But I still would say, don't, because there is always room for improvement.


Trend of postdoc in theoretical computer science When looking at profiles of professors in theoretical computer science, I've noticed a trend that older professors usually go straight from PhD to assistant professor, while younger ones tend to go through 1-2 (sometimes even 3) postdocs.

Is the trend a reality, and if so, what explains it? Is it because there is nowadays more supply of PhD graduates in theoretical computer science (relative to demand), so that people need to go through more training in order to become a professor?

This is a general trend throughout computer science. Part of it comes from a general gradual inflation in cultural expectations. I suspect that a larger amount is due to the fact that CS is no longer a rapidly growing field. For a long time (several decades), as the field expanded and matured, universities were staffing up their CS departments, and could absorb lots of graduates as professors. Now, though, the great expansion is complete in most developed countries, which means there is a more competitive market and a need to absorb graduates in holding patterns. The field has not yet adjusted well to this expectation, however, in my opinion, and does not have the well developed methods for matching graduates with postdoc positions. This, in my opinion, is one of the major challenges facing CS academia at the moment.


How to make the most of my time as a volunteer at a research-paper conference? I'll be attending as a volunteer at a prominent conference for computer-science research papers. Do you have any advice for how I can do a good job in my role, and also make the most of my time at the conference?

Based on my experience, attending in conferences as the volunteers often makes you perform some pre-defined tasks, based on the considered role for you, tightly. As an instance, you might be recruited at the reception desk of the conference and most of your time will be dedicated to the registration-based stuffs and the related matters. Or seemingly, you would be engaged with the support team to make the conference atmosphere more convenient for the participants.

So, you might conclude that most of your time would be dedicated to performing the tasks, as well as possible. But as most of the tasks might no fill all of your time at the conference, a good plan could be attending at the conference presentation sessions or conference lectures, are which within the scope of your interest.

Of course, based on your chance and smartness, you may be able to grab some special opportunities. Here is my own experience: Once, I was at the service of the escort team at a conference and was responsible for accompanying the guest lectures of the conference to the hotels and conference hall, back and forth. Within the 3-day period of the conference, I did succeed to talk with one of the big GURUs of the control systems on the planet and culminated my raw ideas by his deserving assessments.

So, just open your eyes and be on the edge of your seat to grab every sparkling opportunity.

Good luck


Why subscribe to printed versions of math journals? This question follows from a MathOverflow question, "Why should one subscribe to print Journals".

It seems obvious to me that having print journals in a library is beneficial. Yes, Arxiv, MathSciNet, Blogs and lecture notes by Mathematicians, Math Overflow, Wikipedia and Scholarpedia all of these have been extremely helpful in dissemination of research mathematics. Amongst other things electronic copies of articles helped immensely in increasing accessibility.

Most journals these days have an online version. Which probably only a few would argue is not beneficial.

What I can't get myself agree is the opinion that one should stop subscribing to print copies of journals altogether. The arguments against subscribing both print and online I have come across are cost, space constraint, and redundancy.

The difference between online and print+online versions of journals are often marginal. If space constraint is an issue then one can argue against having a library as well. Why subscribe to the journals at all as most of the articles are available in the internet free.

What I can't fathom is the argument that print version of journals have become redundant.

I am asking this as in a discussion regarding journal subscription many faculty members expressed the opinion that we should stop subscribing to print version of the journals. How does one defend the case for need of print journals?

Am I overly emotional and just nostalgic for old times? So many times I chanced upon a result while browsing through the pages of a journal; sometimes relevant to my own area, and sometimes totally unrelated but so exciting that it got me interested in that area.

I am sure this issue or debate is not limited to my university and I am asking this question here hoping to benefit from the comments and thoughts you may share.

My question is what are the benefits of subscribing print version of journals, even if online versions are available. How it helps the research of faculty and graduate students.

Ok, as a paper fetichist, OA activist and former scientific advisor for a mathematical library, I cannot not answer this. But I must distinguish several perspectives.

What I like about paper journals

I like to hold them, and let the paper smell and nice typography sink in in the background of my mathematical immersion.

Unfortunately, most large commercial publisher are doing such an awful job that this emotion is barely possible anymore with many otherwise great journals. Come on: GAFA allows an article to start on a left page, in Advances you see both recto and verso superimposed because of the low-quality paper, even Inventiones has too light or too bold printing making papers sometimes difficult to read. Thank goodness there are still Acta with large yellow pages, the Annals, the journals of MSP and a few others that stand out, but unfortunately I lost my library when I got my current position.

I like that I get to know about what is done outside my fields

When I still had a great library with many paper subscriptions, I would look at all abstracts in certain journals, and when an abstract seemed interesting I would read the introduction. It would very rarely result in a direct connection to my own works, but I think I got several research ideas that way and more importantly, it would enlarge my mathematical culture constantly.

This point could be emulated in an electronic format (and is partially, through e.g. arXiv email alerts), but it is not the same at least for me, and in the current state of affairs.

I like the calm and solemnity of a library

I enjoyed very much to go from volume to volume following citations and knowing that I would get in a few minutes almost all I needed, while benefiting with the almost monastic atmosphere of a library. Being out of my office, this also meant no interruptions.

This was only possible because the library I had was really great.

What are reasons to keep paper subscriptions outside of my own experience

To hold what we buy

For some time, electronic subscriptions gave permanent access to the period that was subscribed, but this seems to become the exception rather than the rule, and in any case might turn difficult to enforce (if you need a trial to get access, that is an issue). Once you buy a volume of journal, the publisher will not get in your library and take it back. There is a great safety in this, that electronic subscription cannot provide completely.

In France, we are devising a plan to have every significant mathematical journal identified and subscribed to by at least two libraries, in paper version, with a pledge to take good care of them (have them binded, indexed, etc.), mainly as a safety net.

Not much more

Honestly, the use of paper versions have declined so much that it is often difficult to argue in favor of paper versions, and I totally understand the choice to transform libraries into learning centers and concentrate on electronic subscription. It makes me a bit sad, but I get it.

One thing that has not been considered enough until now, is how to get electronic version better. They are still too close from scanned papers, which makes the situation far from optimal. My bet currently is that the energy needed to defend paper would be more useful in pushing for better public scholarly communication infrastructures (hat tip to Björn Brembs).


Should I change my proposed solution for paper rejected because of lack of novelty or originality? From my understanding of the reviewers' comments, it means our proposed solution adds nothing new to the body of knowledge even if we get better results than the state-of-the-art work.

The reviewers believe our work is just an application of existing literature. While many published works do integration + per-existence method to enhance the result, we use pre-processing + per-existence method to do the same. We were rejected, while others were accepted.

Any advice is appreciated.

Lack of Novelty is an ill-defined statement. If you and your co-authors believe the manuscript has good contributions (compared to similar papers in the field) then probably the reviewers are just not expert in the area and thus thought of your work as marginal contribution. I would suggest addressing the reviewers comments to your best and submitting to a new venue.


Thesis contributions: where/how to specify them? I am a physics student and I am presently writing my Master thesis.

My work has been a theoretical/numerical analysis of data produced by a simulation written by my advisor.

I would like to write explicitly somewhere that I wrote all the programs for the data analysis and performed the analysis itself, but the simulation code has been written by my advisor.

Where/how should I include this remark?

The thesis is structured as follows:

Contents
Introduction
Methods
Results
Discussion and Conclusions
Appendices
Acknowledgements
Bibliography

Usually that is included in the Preface, which comes in the beginning of the thesis. Some call it 'Declaration of Authorship' instead of 'Preface'. See for example these guidelines.


Is my supervisor making things clearer or confusing? I am struggling a lot these days while presenting in front of my supervisor. I make many mistakes, sometimes very stupid mistakes, and he is now saying, "You need to avoid these mistakes." I am not able to focus on theorems, lemmas, etc. but instead focus on things like how to avoid mistakes in front of him. Many times I feel nervous in front of him, sometimes sweating in front him due to nervousness. Although he tries to make me calm but also give strict feedback.

The one question that makes me worry is that he knows the things I am presenting in front of him, but he doesn't try to clarify things. To me it appears that he creates confusion in the proof that I try to present.

Question: Is my supervisor making things clearer or confusing?

On the comment of @Magicsowon I am going to add a detail here. When I discuss things with him he asks, "What is this?" Now the problem is there can be multiple definitions of the same term. Then I often assume the wrong one and do the proof. In the literature I follow, things are not defined in a good way so most of the time it happens that there is a confusion on concepts.

When and why would I, as a supervisor, ask students "What's this?" rather than just telling them (assuming that "this" is something I already know about)? The most likely situation is that I can't tell whether the student understands the relevant definition. If I already knew that the student didn't understand the definition, then I'd explain it, but if I'm unsure about the student's understanding, then I might ask questions intended to show me what the student knows or doesn't know. The student might view such questions the way you did, as "making things doubtful", but that wouldn't be my primary intent. (It might be a good side effect; if the student has a wrong idea, causing doubt about that idea might be a good preface to explaining the correct idea or to sending the student to study it.)

I'm worried by the last part of the material you edited in at the end of the question, the part about multiple definitions of the same term, assuming the wrong definition, things not defined in a good way, and a confusion of concepts. This sounds like a recipe for a disaster. I would recommend that, as soon as you see two genuinely different definitions of the same term, you try to determine whether they are equivalent. If they aren't, or if you can't decide whether they are, then ask your adviser to explain. Are there really two different concepts with the same name? If so, which interpretation of the name should you use? Getting the definition clear is necessary before any other work involving that concept; anything built on unclear definitions will be unclear (if not outright nonsense).


As an instructor can I use previous work history as examples? I teach computer science (USA - graduate level).  I am teaching a software design course, and for a lecture I am to give on software anti-patterns I would like to use a real world example from an institution I was previously employed with.  To share the example I would create some abstract UML class diagrams showing the pattern that was used, I would explain the general purpose of the application and share where we got it wrong and how the students could learn from the anti-pattern.  I don't have to reveal any code (not that I have any) or share any trade secrets, and I don't even have to use the name of organization.  However if someone was to read my C.V. they could probably ascertain what organization I was speaking in reference to.

Is it considered 'ethical' behavior to share this example? Or should I seek authorization from the previous institution? Are there certain things I should do to protect myself or further obfuscate this example?

As far as I know I never signed any sort of NDA or non-compete covenant.

Yes, students always like “real” examples. You seem to have “anonymized” it sufficiently.

Those examples that start “You have 3 widgets produced by a widget company...” are SO boring, using relevant material is always good.

Could you re-write it as a case study if that is relevant.


How should I ask for letters of recommendation whose strength is dependent on intended program? TL;DR I finished bachelor's and master's in mathematical finance but want to pursue pure mathematics, particularly in probability theory. I'm not sure if I should apply directly for a PhD. I might apply for a second master's first.

I think the strength of the letter of recommendation (or whether or not there will be a letter of recommendation) from my professors may depend on the program to which I am applying. How should I ask for a letter in this context?

My past questions: 1 2 3 4

[Details removed following suggestion in comments]

So how might I ask for a letter of recommendation under this context? What I think to ask so far is to first request a consultation asking for advice in applying for graduate programs. At this point I explain I'm not sure if I'm going to apply for a second master's or a PhD. Then of course I ask for a recommendation letter. But how? These are what I have in mind:

  Would you be uncomfortable writing me a letter of recommendation?

or

  Would you be uncomfortable writing me a letter of recommendation? Would the strength of the letter depend on the program to which I am applying (whether second master's or PhD)?

or

  Would you be uncomfortable writing me a letter of recommendation? Would the comfortability of writing the letter depend on the program to which I am applying (whether second master's or PhD)?

or

  Would you be uncomfortable writing me a letter of recommendation? Would the strength or comfortability of writing the letter depend on the program to which I am applying (whether second master's or PhD)?

To me, the following progression seems more natural than either of your suggestions:

  I am interested in further studies but I am not sure whether to go to a second masters or a PhD program from here. [Here is my background and here are my career goals.] What are your thoughts?

then

  Do you think you could write a strong letter of recommendation for me for [the kind of program you suggested would be best for me]?

and then, if the answer is yes,

  If I decide to apply to [the other kind of program], do you think you could write as strong a letter of recommendation for me for that program?


Should a history book written as a narrative be disregarded as a source? Recently, I found several sources relevant to my research paper, and also written by prominent historians, but the book is written in first person, in some narrative form, with dialogue added. I find it a little strange, because the text has complete conversations, that I think could not possibly be recorded in such detail.
When I studied my BA in History, there was a course that discussed in detail how to evaluate a source, against the CRAAP test and other similar measures, yet I'm not sure where this fails the checklist:

Currency
Relevance
Authority
Accuracy
Purpose

My colleagues keep recommending me such texts to use. Are these types of texts something I should skip over when writing a research paper?

[T]he book is written in first person, in some narrative form, with dialogue added. I find it a little strange, because the text has complete conversations, that I think could not possibly be recorded in such detail.

The author may have recreated dialogue, rather than definitely sourced dialogue. Perhaps look for an author's note, disclaimer, or similar, to see whether techniques are disclosed.

Should a history book written as a narrative be disregarded as a source? Are these types of texts something I should skip over when writing a research paper?

Use sources you believe to be accurate. When there's doubt, sources needn't be abandoned, caution can be taken to absolve responsibility for prior errors, e.g., Author X provides the following account, "...".


Lecturer asks for argument for re-submission Our group submitted part 1 of an assignment a few hours before the deadline, only to realise one of our links to the a piece of work was incorrect.

As soon as we found out, we emailed him explaining the situation and asking if there were consequences and if so what would they be.

He replied asking what we think should be done; arguments for and against re-submitting in our case from the perspective a university assignment and as a deliverable to a client.

How could I reply?

It sounds like the lecturer is trying to use the incident as a learning opportunity, aka teachable moment. He is asking you to argue your case in order to get you to think about the implications of your request so that you will learn a valuable lesson unrelated to the specific topic of the assignment. Probably he is reasoning that the current low-stakes situation is an excellent time to learn this lesson because the consequences of making a mistake are not large; by being a bit harsh or annoying now, he can teach you something that is likely to save you much more severe consequences at some later time in your life.

To clarify, I'm not expressing an opinion about whether making such a demand of you is a good idea, but I suspect that this is the reasoning motivating the lecturer's request.

As for how to reply, I suggest just following the lecturer's instructions and coming up with the best arguments you can. I could offer more specific advice, but I think that would defeat the purpose of what the lecturer is hoping you'd do, which is to think about this issue yourself. (Nor do I think there is a universally correct answer, for that matter.) And again to clarify, by saying this I don't mean to imply that there's anything wrong with you coming here to ask the question, but I sincerely think you're better off coming up with your own answers. Good luck!


In statement of purpose, good to mention about learning from some professor's lecture notes and books? In statement of purpose for applying to a PhD program, is it good to mention about learning from some professor's lecture notes and books (not papers, because don't get to read them yet), and finding them helpful?
Will it make the statement more personal and therefore good?

Or is it better not to say so, and rather to keep the essay short?

You do not want to convey the message, "I am applying to your school because I think Professor X is great."  Everybody knows Professor X is great.  That's why they hired her.

The question is, why should they want you?

A message you do want to convey is, "I am applying to your school because my research goals are well-aligned with existing interests in the department."  If you can incorporate Professor X's notes and books into that story, great.  Otherwise, leave them out of it.


Is it acceptable to put programming code as proof in paper? I used statistical language R to fit probability distribution to acquired data. Instead of doing it by hand I relied on code. I wrote something like "probability density function was computed using programming language R (for more details see appendix A)". And appendix A has exact code to compute this. I also put reference to R package documentation. Is it bad to rely external tools for proof?

From what I can guess about the context, I would avoid putting the code in your paper unless:

the code is really short (say no more than half a column);
the code is interesting in itself;
and you know that your average reader understands the language R.

Otherwise, it would probably better to omit the code altogether and write, in a note, something like:

  To those interested, the authors can provide the R code employed to compute the probability density functions described in this work.


Using the author's reasoning of experimental observations in literature review I am writing a review paper and I came across many research articles in which the author tries to explain the cause of the experimental observation, where the observation was the aim and main output of the paper.

Can I include those yet-to-be-verified hypothesis about their observations in my review paper? And is it necessary to cite those authors while including those hypotheses regarding the experimental observations in my review paper?

When writing either a review section of a paper or an entire review paper, it is extremely important to be clear about which contributions came from which paper, and which form of evidence they are: does that paper have direct evidence on that point, rely on other papers/rely on an assumption, or develop the point as speculation/theory/explanation?
Obviously, you should cite any of these that you use, but you should cite them differently. For instance, if you have an article by author X, X might condense the results of previous literature (possibly citing authors Y and Z), present their own experiment, and discuss the theory and possible implications of their own experiment and interpret it in light of the literature. You would want to distinguish the three.

X emphasizes that the previous literature finds a strong relationship between concept 1 and concept 2, and considers the work of Y and Z to be "extremely strong evidence that causality runs both ways" (X, p. 876).
X finds [shows, provides evidence] that [experiment results] [in context].
X argues [concludes, suggests, wonders, hypothesizes...] that [explanation put forth].

I'm guessing you were already thinking about a certain hypothesis, and then you saw X's paper and realized that they had thrown in that hypothesis at the end. Definitely cite them. Even if you had been looking at X's paper for the experimental results, you should also re-read what their discussion/conclusion says, and if those are relevant to the discussion, you should acknowledge the ideas in some way. (When would their discussion or conclusions not be relevant? Perhaps if you're interested in something that they had to account for on the way to their focus.) It could even be a simple mention just to acknowledge that they said it, too.

Many scholars consider concept 1 to be a likely explanation (cf. X, Y and Z, Q).

It's OK if you conclude your review with an interpretation that's similar to what X suggested, as long as you have reviewed articles suggesting other possibilities and you reference as you're concluding that it's similar to X.

Overall, there is mounting evidence that, as X suggested, [explanation].

Your contribution is a consideration of additional material, synthesis of ideas, and your own opinion/emphasis on what's important. For the purposes of publishing, if X has already covered similar area, your review paper may not be extremely interesting or important unless you can show why the overall question/field matters or that people are still working under alternative assumptions or not yet convinced.


I want to be a guest speaker at a university Currently, I am doing a PhD and I want be a guest speaker at one of my previous universities. The topic of my PhD is very similar to what I studied at the university and therefore, I want to give a small talk to the students there. How can I ask the authorities at my previous university to do the same?

Find out who organizes the relevant seminar. Often there is a website listing talks and a contact person. If you can't find this information, just pick someone from the faculty who is likely to be interested in your talk.
Either email that person yourself, or get someone (e.g. your advisor) to introduce you. Introduce yourself; say you are interested in visiting the department and/or giving a talk; indicate what you would like to talk about; and specify what dates work for you. The following email is a good start.

  Dear So-and-so,

  I am visiting Madeuptown the week of Sextember 47th and would be interested in visiting the University of Madeuptown underwater basket weaving department.
  I am currently a PhD student in underwater basket weaving at Fictitious University advised by John Namedrop and I have been working on the use of new wicker weaving materials, which may be of interest to the students in your department.
  Please let me know if you would be interested in arranging something.

  Best,

  Das

I have been the organizer of a computer science group seminar (in the US) and I regularly received such emails. Indeed many of them were much more direct than this.

Most likely, you'll be invited to speak. However, it is possible that they are unable to schedule something suitable at the time you specify. (If you don't get a positive response, then leave it at that. I.e., don't pester them.)

It's worth a try if you are interested in giving a talk. The worst thing that could happen is that your email is ignored.

If you are lucky, they may offer to cover some of your expenses. However, don't bet on it if you are "self-inviting."


Effect on image of a vanity award on CV/Profile I could not find any previous questions on the effect of vanity awards compared to vanity publishers.  I recently noticed a CV on a university website with a few awards of International Scientist of the Year, or something as such.  I found the giver of this award as IBC https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Biographical_Centre .  It seems from the page to be criticism on the organization.

I am curious, how do these types of awards being listed effect the image of the Professor?

If it is bad for the image, is it worse than vanity press, since it requires no work at all (compared to having to write a manuscript, even if it is bad).  Or is it not as bad because it doesn't look like passing off published work?

I am looking to know these answers to conclude if putting this type of award on a CV is beneficial, detrimental, or neutral in the general/international community.

For context, I know the Professor is in Asia, in which there is probably a good amount of pressure to come up with activities or awards for their career.  For diplomatic reasons, we can assume someone nominated them for the award and they are unaware of the feedback on Wikipedia.

If I saw a vanity award of this type on somebody's CV, I would have a hard time ever taking that person seriously.

At least with predatory publishers, there is often a reasonable excuse: it's easy for people early in their career or at smaller institutions to get tricked by the slicker operations.  Indeed, sometimes the line between low-tier venue and vanity publisher is quite unclear.  As a result, real, sincere scientific work can end up getting sent to a horrible venue. It's unlikely to be very good work (just by correlation, since poorly connected researchers are less likely to be producing good work), but any shame associated with such a publication can be readily diluted by publishing good publications in good venues.

A vanity award of the sort you describe, however, I can see no such mitigating circumstances. When random people you've never heard of before ask you for money to call you "Scientist of the Year," you can only accept if you are very gullible or very vain.  Moreover, unlike a publication in a bad venue, there is no reason to keep such a terrible award on one's CV unless you still believe it is somehow valid.

In short: I would consider a vanity award on a CV to be quite ridiculous, and a good reason to have a high degree of suspicion of a person's work unless given strong evidence to the contrary.


Is it a good idea to take a break from studying a mathematics PhD and revisit academia at a later stage? In September I started a mathematics PhD at a UK university straight after my undergraduate MMath degree at a different university. On the whole, I am enjoying the experience. However, I've been having recurring thoughts that perhaps I am not cut out for doctorate level work and it might be a good idea to revisit mathematical studies at a later stage.

Basically, since coming here I've been feeling consistently like my heart isn't in it (and this has had a negative effect on my work ethic). This is not necessarily because I’m not capable of doing it, but rather because I never had a proper break from academia and I feel like I've been running out of steam. I know PhD students very frequently go through spells of feeling dispirited, but I feel that if my heart is really in mathematics that this shouldn't be happening. I would rather go into doctoral studies with a running start knowing that I am adequately trained in the area I am in, rather than adjusting to a learning curve (and an inexperienced supervisor).

Here are some options I have considered:

Having a complete break from academia (6 months to a year), followed by a period where I slowly ease myself back in at my own pace by reading.
Taking CDT (Centre for Doctoral Training) courses. I had previously applied to this and been rejected, but now I think I would be more competitive. I think this rigorous training would be helpful for me.
Doing something altogether different -- learning another programming language and doing a programming job, or working in simulation/modeling at the Met Office, or another company that relies heavily on fluid dynamics. Or maybe even the EPSRC (which is where a lot of the funding for PhD mathematics students comes from)
Getting a normal job to demonstrate people skills, and saving up money to do another Masters programme, which will put me in a very good position for my PhD.

After doing the above, I could return to a PhD programme much
   later, when I am a much more mature person with a
   better mindset towards my work.

Thankfully, my parents are willing to support me emotionally and financially while I pursue any of these.

My question is whether this is a good plan. In particular:

Is it a good idea to take a break from studies if wanting to
continue them at a later date, especially for mathematics? Would it
hurt any opportunities later on down the line to take up a PhD a
year or so from now?
Would my department or supervisor think badly of me for wanting to
terminate my studies - and (generally speaking) would I not have to
pay back the studentship instalments that I've been paid so far?
(I've been funded solely by the University, not by a funding body
such as the EPSRC).
What would be some worthwhile things to consider doing during a
break from academia?

Update: it sounds like this would not be a great idea, and I should only make the move if I am really, really convinced about it. Nonetheless, I'm leaning further and further towards it because I think it's better to take a break from my studies now rather than 3 years down the line. I don't seem to have the motivation required to be a good doctoral student at the moment. This is something I might speak to my advisor about.

Is it a good idea to take a break from studies if wanting to continue them at a later date, especially for mathematics?

That's a tricky question.  There are probably some people for whom this is a good idea, but I wouldn't say it's generally one.  If it's possible in your current situation to essentially hit the "pause button" on your studies and be guaranteed the ability to come back (I think this is possible at many US universities), it might not be so bad, but otherwise you're taking a pretty big risk.  Also, in even as short a time as 6 months or a year, you risk forgetting a lot.  Certainly this is something a lot of other people I know who've taken breaks (say between undergraduate and graduate degrees) have mentioned.

I would think about trying to arrange a shorter vacation (maybe 1 month) first, and see how that feels.  Taking a whole year is a genie that will be hard to get back in the bottle, and you don't know how you will feel, say, two months in.

  Would it hurt any opportunities later on down the line to take up a PhD a year or so from now?

It certainly might.

  Would my department or supervisor think badly of me for wanting to terminate my studies - and (generally speaking) would I not have to pay back the studentship instalments that I've been paid so far? (I've been funded solely by the University, not by a funding body such as the EPSRC).

I can't speak to them (or speak about the financial aspects), but probably it will not look great.  You should be prepared for everyone in the department to assume this means you are dropping out, no matter what you say about coming back.

  What would be some worthwhile things to consider doing during a break from academia?
  Has anyone else on here had experiences of a PhD (particularly maths) not going too well and feeling like they have had to stop or recharge their batteries?

I do know of one situation where this worked out a very well.  A friend of mine in grad school took a year off (after 3 years in the program) to teach in an inner city school.  I think at the time he started he was not so sure he wanted to finish, but the experience motivated him very effectively to go back and complete his degree, since he realized teaching middle school was definitely not for him.


Using a quote to begin a new chapter in a thesis I am doing a Masters thesis. Can I use a quote to begin each chapter of my Master's thesis?

Epigraphs are generally fine unless otherwise proscribed by university rules or the style guide used in your field. (MLA has specific formatting guidelines for them, I'd imagine others do too)

But first ask yourself if they add something to your paper. For example, a quote from Borges on an section on recursion would go rather nicely, setting up the ideas/theme far faster than a stale introductory paragraph. A quote from a historical leader might establish a link between the past and a chapter on modern day politics or society. But an inspirational quote about hard work probably doesn't belong in methodologies chapter.


At what point can I call my professor by their first names as an undergraduate research student? I'm currently working closely with a professor on a research project as an undergrad student. I always address her by her last name: Dr.xx. However, this makes me feel distant from her.. I am wondering by which point I could call her by first name?

Here is some background info:
I got to know her in person by taking a class taught by her and then started working together on this project at the end of last term. We had meetings together for a few times and exchanged a few emails back and forth. She always addressed herself by her first name in the email but I insisted called her Dr.xx to show my respect. However, some of her grad students in the lab are calling her by first name...

Thanks!

Ask her!

Forget about figuring out when you can address her by her first name. Be up front, and ask politely if you can address her by her first name.

Do not be offended if she declines.

Naturally, if in conversation she invites you to call her by her first name, then that's pretty clear.


Should I index all the specific terms which are included in appendix? I am writing my master thesis (Mathematics field) and I would like to know if I should index all the specific terms which are included in appendix.

Is it necessary?

Institutions that I am aware of generally do not require an index because building a good, useful index is very difficult.  Also, these days people will typically just search for terms in a document rather than looking them up in an index.

The question that I would ask instead is: what is the value that you are trying to get from an index, and is there a better way to get it?  In heavily mathematical documents, I find it very valuable when the author includes somewhere a table of symbols and/or terms, which I can refer to when I'm wading through equations and trying to remember what on Earth v-prime-double-hat and w-double-prime actually mean.  I especially appreciate this when I am the author, and I need to look back at the document a few months later after my brain has flushed its cache.

So if you want your thesis to be accessible to readers, I strongly recommend adding tables of symbols/etc.  As to where: you can put them anywhere you want.  I personally prefer sticking the table right at the beginning of the first place where the symbols start to show up in earnest, both as being most proximate to the need and as a warning sign to the reader indicating heavy going ahead.


Why is the Marie Curie Individual Fellowship only for 'experienced researchers'? The Marie Curie Individual Fellowship (IF) has the following eligibility requirement:

"Researchers must be experienced researchers (ER), i.e. at the date of the call deadline (for IF) ... be in possession of a doctoral degree or have at least four years of full-time equivalent research experience." (page 80 of the PDF Work Programme 2018-2020: Marie Skłodowska-Curie actions).

By my calculations, this means that that a student spending 4 or fewer years in graduate school must have a lag time of 6-12 months after obtaining the PhD before they could begin to recieve funding. Why is this desirable? Are there any other EU-wide fellowships for STEM which could fill the gap?

(I am aware of other postdoc funding opportunities but none that are as prestigious.)

EDIT: To clarify, why are PhD students not eligible to apply in the fall of their final year, unless they already have "four years of full-time equivalent research experience" at that point? (i.e. a student graduating in May 2021 and applying in September 2020)

Funders are allowed to make their own rules. Typically they try to be as fair as possible, but there will always be some 'edge effects' where the rules have unintended consequences.

In the case of Marie Curie grants, there is an explicit intention to draw in people from across the entire EU (and beyond). As such, the rules need to accommodate the wide variety of different systems, norms and expectations found in different countries. The clearest point of synchronisation is the date of award of the doctoral degree, and this is what has been chosen in the rules.

Some additional advantages:

If applications were allowed before the doctoral degree was awarded, there would inevitably be cases where someone didn't complete the degree before their fellowship was supposed to start.
All applicants should have a concrete body of work that can be used to assess their suitability for a fellowship.

Finally, while I don't know the statistics for Marie Curie specifically, in general success rates are skewed towards more experienced applicants. It may well be that the people impacted by this rule are generally not competitive for the fellowships.


Do people say why they decline a paper review request? I am curious to know what actions are generally thought to be acceptable when one sends a request for a paper review, especially a journal one.

When academics are asked to review a manuscript and they have the relevant expertise, is it common for them to decline the review without giving any reason?

Established scientists receive a large number of review requests. A few years back I decided to tally the review requests I received, and the number I accepted. In the end I received 112 and accepted 28 over the course of a year.  Add to that the editorial work I did for three journals and you get an awful lot of uncompensated, unrewarded time invested for the good of the field. (I typically spend about eight hours a week on reviews and editorial work.) So yes, I declined a large number of review requests every year, many of which I would have been well qualified to handle. When the editorial system allows, I try to at least leave a note explaining that I'm too busy, but as jakebeal notes, this is not always an option.

So yes, qualified reviewers can and do turn down many review requests, often without providing an explanation. As an editor, I know that if I ask well known researchers this will happen as often as not, and I don't mind that one bit. What I do dislike is when people don't bother to click the "decline" link on the review request, and force me to wait for a week before giving up and trying to find a new reviewer. This slows down the review process and ultimately slows down science for everyone.


Standards for Self Plagiarism Caveats and Context

I have been out of academia and the publishing game for nearly 2 decades so this might just be a question about changing mores, difference between disciplines, or just general mis-remembering on my part.

My question is driven by this question where someone is accused of self-plagiarism for reusing text from a grant proposal.

Comments on that question are making me feel like the definition of self-plagiarism has significantly shifted and things like below are not OK by today's standards.

Type 1: Self-Plagiarizing Proposals

This is almost a category error in my mind, of course text is recycled from proposals all the time.  I know that I have seen or even done:

Revising and resubmitting a proposal to a different funding agency when it was rejected elsewhere with minimal changes.
Reusing entire sections describing methods or facilities used in the research.
Reusing sections defining the problem space, notations, framing what we are working on.
Doing the verb tense dance to convert a proposal into a report, "we will investigate" -> "we investigated".

Type 2: Publishing Incremental Versions

It was not uncommon in my area to see the "same" paper move through the levels of rigor in venues as the work is refined. For instance you might see a paper start off as an unrefereed seminar paper, then move to a refereed conference paper and then finally be expanded to a longer journal article.  I thought this was normal and nobody tried to hide that they did this, there is always some text or comment describing how Paper X was an extended version of Paper Y that had been presented at BLAHConf in whatever year.

I even remember one of the paper indexing sites that would annotate the PDFs for you so you could see what text in particular was different between versions.

I don't think that this was the same thing as playing the MPU (Minimal Publishable Unit) game, but maybe it was.

Type 3: Reboiling the Boilerplate

This is one I was and am (in industry) flagrantly guilty of--all the time--every day.

Maybe this is just the result of working in an empirical data driven type field, but a significant fraction of presenting a result is recording the methods and techniques applied to the problem.  I don't feel bad going back to my previous text and pulling the paragraph describing my Turbo-Encabulator and then tweaking it to mention that it had been malleated by 1.5 nofer trunnions.

One important thing in this case is I am not actually referring to the previous text, that text and the new text are actually describing two similar configurations in "my lab".  It feels ludicrous that this would also be considered to be self-plagiarism in any useful meaning of the word.

Honest Question -- Not Yelling At Clouds

This question is not meant to sound ranty, I am safely removed from academia, I have no dog in this fight.

My question remains, are those cases of self-plagiarism by today's standards?  Has the standard shifted over the years?  Must all text be generated anew for every publication?

Proposals are tightly-controlled by rules. The only thing that really matters is legally handling the money. Different funding agencies often explicitly allow you to submit the same proposal. They will likely reject it anyway. If you get funding from both and you proposed the same thing, you will only be allowed to accept one of them (or else go to jail).

Also many journals have a cutoff for incremental improvements, for example of 30 percent new material that is required. Given that number of submissions to journals has increased dramatically, this kind of requirement probably has as well, with many journals insisting on entirely new material. In ye olden days you could also get away with only a few references. Now your reference section needs to be some kind of tour de force of reference thoroughness too.

There is finally the issue of copyright and the (rather problematic) fact that journals want to sell our work as a product. Which we gave them for free. Plus helped them screen the products we would most want to buy for them. So they tend to push the motivation for demanding the text be as novel as possible, and now they have automatic tools to help enforce this.

You'll note none of the above required the concept of "self-plagiarism", which I tend to think is an unnecessary concept we already have covered (when it actually makes sense) by other rules of ethics.


How important are physics and other non-math courses for admission into a math PhD? I am a second year math major, and I intend to do my PhD from a top math school. Until now, I haven't taken any university level physics course. Somewhere in this site, I saw someone writing that courses related to theoretical physics (heavily loaded with mathematics) are also very important besides the regular math courses. So, my question is: How important are the physics courses? Or any other courses?

Math grad programs do not look at physics courses on the transcript, or think in those terms.

The point is that higher-level (not formulaic) physics courses can be beneficial to math people by providing other inputs for intuition. A common obstacle is that the higher-level physics courses do speak in terms of the lower-level ones, which are often quite alien to/from any sensible mathematical world-view.

But if one skips over those "immediate" things, one can find that there are "physcial imperatives" mandating mathematical "facts"... which might not be obvious on "purely mathematical" grounds.

The grandest example is "Green's functions" ... about which volumes can be written... An immediate point is that the idea is wonderful, is necessary, even if one cannot justify it. Green got the idea pre-1850, and it was completely understood in "rigorous" terms by L. Schwartz in 1950. Not easy, ...

That is, understanding other (very serious) inputs to mathematics is obviously helpful.


Is a professor obligated to provide feedback on an assignment? I have recently completed a course where a very large assignment was handed in just before the exam. After the course finished, we were never given feedback on this assignment. I am very frustrated about this because, even though I can see my grade and that I did well, it means nothing to me--I pay tuition so that I can learn and not so that I can get a grade. I have emailed the professor and have not received a response. I have also emailed my program's coordinator and she has told me that she has "no leverage with other departments and their profs". If it is of any value, the course was in Psychology.

I see this as a business transaction. I have paid the university for the service of teaching me. The professor is made responsible by the university to teach me. Teaching requires providing feedback. Therefore, if the professor is not providing feedback, the university is not fulfilling their part of the business transaction.

What are the professor's obligations with respect to my education once I have been put in his class?

How should I deal with this? The professor does not answer emails and I've never been fortunate enough to run into him at his office.

Edit: I've trimmed unnecessary information.

Giving good feedback is good practice. However, people working at the university have multiple responsibilities and they need to make trade-offs. So it is very well possible that your professor made a legitimate choice, we don't know and neither do you. Moreover, professors have substantial freedom in making those trade-offs. So there is very little you can do to force him to give feedback. Trying that will certainly back-fire. Instead, your best bet is to politely ask for an appointment, and be flexible about when that appointment takes place.


Can portions of my PhD thesis be later submitted to conferences? It's fairly standard to submit thesis chapters to journals. However, in my field (theoretical computer science) conference publication is much more important. Is there any problem with taking a section of my thesis and submitting it later to a conference? Would the conference object that this was dual submission?

In computer science in general, you can submit thesis extracts to conference just as freely as you would submit them to a journal.  In both cases, the principle is the same: a thesis is not really a peer-reviewed publication, so your submission would still be the first peer-reviewed publication of the material.  You must, however, cite your thesis and clearly acknowledge the source of the material as being adapted from your thesis.


Applying for Academic position after Phd completion I completed my Phd 5 months ago and I left university to return to my home country. I was an associate lecturer and now I am converting my PhD into articles with my supervisor. The problem is that my working experience stopped 5 months ago and this does not look good for employers/universities. Is there a way to include in my working experience the fact that I am still working with my supervisor in order to produce papers for the university? Can I write that I am a Research Fellow or something else?

Talk to your supervisor about how to formalize this role.

Most likely you can get an honorary contract or something similar, which will give you an official affiliation with the university that you can put on your CV.

Besides putting it on your CV, it will also allow you to use the university affiliation when publishing.

The only barrier I see to this would be visa issues, if you no longer have a right to work or study in the country of the university.  I'm not sure the impact on an unpaid position, but it's possible that this would prevent an honorary contract.  In that case, simply put something less formalized like "collaboration with X on articles based on PhD thesis" I don't think it will cause much of a problem.

Potential employers are worried about gaps where you are doing nothing; as long as you can show you are academically active, even if not in a formal role, I don't think you have to worry.


What action can be taken if hostel allotments are not out just after admissions are done? I just joined a university for my post graduation studies, but as I'm from a different country, I don't have a place to stay. Therefore, I asked the hostel prefect if I can stay in a room as a paying guest until the hostel allotment are out. He said yes. After two weeks however, the DEAN OF STUDENTS WELFARE asked me to leave the place the same day. He took our names and now I got a letter for disciplinary action. What should I do now?

There are two things you need to do:

Apologize to the Dean of Student Welfare for the unauthorized stay in the hostel, explaining that you thought you had permission.
Find somewhere to stay. Possible resources include hotels, AirBnB, the university's housing department, the Dean of Student Welfare (after or as part of step 1), and personal contacts in your department.


Was offered a PhD position, I accepted it but no replies afterwards from the potential supervisors I gave an interview for a Phd position and I was offered the position within a day of the interview. I accepted the offer withing two days (before the deadline) and sent an email stating my acceptance of the offer to the supervisor who interviewed me. No acknowledgement was given  and thereafter I have not received any further emails from their side. I sent another email to follow up and ask if they received my first email, but still no replies. It is now been 2 weeks since they last emailed me. Should I keep waiting, or send another email or just move on and apply for other positions.

I tried all emails I could find to contact them. It is not an email delivery problem, since I corresponded with them using the same email many times before the interview took place and I am receiving emails from other people without any problem.

Edit : Now I have another PhD offer and have a deadline to acfept and reject. Still no replies from the first offer. It is almost been a month now.

What would be the best way to go ahead in this situation? I don't want to be dishonest by accepting both offers and but I also don't want to lose both in case the first offer doesn't work out.
The first offer was not an official one. The email read ' We would like to offer you in the position.'

I don't think you have any reason to worry. Under the current strain and disruption of the pandemic people aren't able to do the things they would normally do. A couple of weeks isn't very long after a deadline as there are probably quite a few administrative tasks that seem to them to be more important to them than reassuring students. The professor in question might have additional issues preventing them from responding in a timely manner (or at all, if they are ill or caring for a family member).

Assume that all is well. You've done what was required of you.

Don't keep hammering, though, as it just makes their workload worse.

On the other hand, you are due an acknowledgement that all is well. A once-a-week email is probably appropriate until you get confirmation.

Note that normal phone numbers aren't being answered at some places. Buildings are locked and people are forbidden to enter, even to retrieve personal effects.

You could, however, keep abreast of any news pertaining to that university by doing web searches. There is a lot of disruption and universities are planning how to finish out this year and finding ways to be flexible for next. Bad things are happening. They could continue to happen.


How should a teaching-assistant deal with an angry student? This happened two semesters ago, when I was teaching-assistant to a class of bachelor students. The lecturer had such marking weights, 30% for teaching assistant class including all the homework and his quizzes and 70% to the midterm and final exams.

At that semester, one of the students did not even attend one of my TA classes, did not solve any homework and also did not take any quizzes. I also gave some extra time to the students to give me their homework if they have missed some of them, but he did not give me any in that period of time.

He passed midterm and final exam with a passing mark and normally, I did not give him any mark for his TA part. His final mark was about 65%. I did not even know this guy personally.

After he was announced of his final mark, he called me by my mobile phone and started shouting and swearing to me over the line. I tried to calm him down and explain his wrong attitude towards the TA class but he did not pay attention. He continuously shouted and told me I will do this and I will do that to you! He never tried to make it clear why he was not working on homework or not attend the class. He expected that because he was good at final exam, I have to neglect his weak work in TA class.

I told him that if I give you extra mark for the homework you did not solve and the exams you did not sit, this will be unfair to other students who came to the class and worked on the course. I did not continue that conversation and turned my phone off. I really wanted to help him, but I found no way indeed.

After that, I did not even report him the the university police or the professor for his behaviour.

Was my attitude toward this lazy and angry student correct? How should teaching-assistants deal with such students who behave crazy? How should a TA calm his angry student down and talk to him logically and what should he do when they behave really bad to them?

As a teaching assistant, you should not be abused.  If a student becomes angry and abusive, you need to disengage and pass the problem upwards.  While TAs participate in the grading of a course, the responsibility and authority for dealing with any significant grading dispute with a student lies with the professor, not with any TA.  It's OK for TAs to deal with minor problems presented calmly (e.g., "You added up the scores and got the wrong total"), but major disputes and angry students are not things a TA can or should attempt to handle.

If you are confronted with an angry student, do not respond to the content of the dispute.  If you do so, you may say something that can cause a major problem for yourself or the professor later.  Instead, just keep repeating something along the lines of,

  "Please calm down. This is something that you need to talk to the professor about."

If the student persists to the point where you feel threatened, then you have both the right and the obligation to get campus authorities involved.  A person who is extensively verbally abusive may become physically violent as well, and you need to protect yourself.

Once you have disengaged from the student, contact the professor immediately and explain the situation.  At that point, it is the professor's responsibility to deal with the student, though they may need more information and input from you in deciding how to proceed.


Running out of Algebraic Symbols I'm currently writing my thesis in computer science. My work contains a large amount of equations to do with linear algebra, data transformations and calculus. On receiving feedback on my first draft from my supervisor, he has told me that I am reusing symbols all over the place. So I am going back over things, but I'm finding that I'm running out of both English and Greek characters and I'm having to constantly search back through the text to see if the symbol I want to use has already been defined. For example:

Take two vectors X and Y with lengths m and n respectively.

All of these symbols have previously been used. So my question is, once a symbol has been defined once, can it not be reused for the whole thesis, and how then should I deal with this problem.

Thanks.

Running out of symbols is a fairly common scenario, and it is usually caused by assigning symbols too early without due consideration to the amount of work yet to come. As such, the main thing to do is to
Restructure
Think about the entire set of symbols you're using.

For which ones is the specific symbol in use crucial for the clarity of the text? There will usually be a core of symbols that you really don't want to reassign, but this is probably smaller than you think. Earmark those symbols for these concepts, and disregard other occurrences (even if they happen earlier in the text).

Keep this core small. Use variations on the symbols (upper/lower case, primes, subscripts) to fit as many variations of the concepts into the key symbols.

Serialize. If you have some sequence of objects which you initially called a, b, c, d, ..., use an appropriate subscript or parenthesis notation to collapse them into a single symbol. Over-expansive naming of sequences of this sort is probably the number-one reason for running out of symbols in the first place.

The other thing you should do is
Encapsulate
It is perfectly OK to have the same symbol appear twice, with different meanings, in the same extended piece of work, as long as there is no confusion between them. This is particularly easy to do if the symbols appear, for example, inside the proof of a theorem. Thus, if at some point you use the symbol x in a context like

Proof. Let x be ... ... ... . ▮

then it is probably OK to re-use the same symbol in a similar encapsulated environment, as long as (i) you clearly define the symbol on its first appearance in each environment, and (ii) you don't (excessively) reference the symbol once you're outside of the encapsulated environments.
Similarly, it is usually OK to reuse symbols in different chapters as long as the topic of the two chapters is sufficiently different compared to the similarity of the symbols and the amount of weight you put into the choice of symbol. This is a very common practice: look at any linear algebra textbook and you'll see the symbol v used a number of times, to refer to vectors that are not necessarily compatible. The techniques they use to avoid confusion are forms of encapsulation.
From the phrasing of your question, it seems that this is partly the problem with your supervisor. One way to go about this is to step up the encapsulation, either by being more clear with the text, by introducing formal environments, or even using graphical means like boxes around examples to make it clear that the symbol choice is local to that environment.
If all else fails
Some amount of creativity is OK
This includes things like multi-letter symbols for important context, though you should be careful with how you typeset them (usually in upright script). However, you should avoid using letters from non-standard alphabets, as they will only further the confusion: few of your readers will know how to pronounce them (which then extends into how they internally vocalize them while reading, and makes it harder for your readers to discuss the paper with each other), and it makes it harder for others to adapt and extend your notation.


Is there usually an on-campus interview when hiring a lecturer with a one year contract? In this case, I am asking about "Lecturer" in the North American sense, which means a faculty member who teaches but is not required to perform research.

It might depend on circumstances. If the contract is non-renewable then perhaps not provided that the CV and letters of recommendation are strong enough for the hiring department to "take a chance". For a renewable contract, the likelihood of requiring an interview probably increase. Also the kind of institution is a factor.

The institution bears responsibility for the people it puts in front of students so there is pretty strong incentive for interviews. Financial imperatives push the other way.

So, common, yes, but not universal.


Should my math teacher talk about my grades in his letter of recommendation? I did really well at school except for the final exams where I got terrible grades. Thoughout the years, my grades were above average but I got terrible grades in my finals(which count for 50% in my country) and that caused me to get a GPA of 2.4.
Should my math teacher talk about how/why i got bad grades in my finals? It's quite clear that I almost failed because of those grades but it's also quite clear that I was an A student before those grades.
If he doesn't talk about my math abilities(or disabilities) then what should he talk about?
Please help me, I need to send this letter next week

Your advisor might be limited by local law about what s/he may say about your grades. But they can probably say that your grades don't completely reflect your abilities and then comment on those abilities. But, IMO, a too-detailed letter won't serve you as well as one that is more general and speaks about your abilities. If they focus on the positive then it should serve you better, I think.

However, if you have difficulty in exams you should find a way to work on that. Perhaps it is just ineffective studying. Cramming is a poor way to learn, if that is it. Taking and reviewing better notes throughout the course is a much better way to learn.


What do people exactly mean when they say "PhD supervisors guide their PhD students in their research" I am a statistics PhD student, and I just want to know what do people exactly mean when they say "PhD supervisors guide their PhD students in their research".
My supervisor is a Statistician. He has a master's and a PhD in statistics. His area of research is analysis of open-ended survey questions. Him and his past graduate students has worked on basic machine learning algorithms like KNN, SVM, etc to analyze open-ended survey responses. None of his previous research had involved applying a sophisticated deep learning based language models (e.g. Transformer, RNN ,LSTM) to analyze open-ended survey questions. He is in general not an expert in natural language processing (e.g. like those natural language processing professors from computer science department).
When I was starting my PhD program, I asked my supervisor about my general research direction, and my supervisor gave me a list of papers for me to read, and told me that this is where my research is heading. All of these papers were computer science papers on deep neural language models in natural language processing (which has no hint of analyzing survey open-ended responses). I got slightly confused and asked my supervisor that whether I am to apply these state-of-the-art natural language processing models to analyze open-ended survey responses. My supervisor told me that I won't be analyzing open-ended survey questions like he does.
So I read those papers, came up with research questions, and ran experiments and tried to make publications all of which were failures. I can't really discuss any technically of my work with my supervisor even at a broad level because he lacks the general knowledge about the field (e.g. he told me one day that he has never heard of the words like "syntax" and "semantics" before. These are all basic terminologies that any one in natural language processing community understands). I can't discuss technicality of my work with any of other faculty members / phd students in my department neither because the type of research I am doing mainly concerns with computer science and they don't do this type of research. It also took my supervisor quite sometime to understand that I need an access to good computing resource to be able to carry out a quality research. I'd really hate say this but these things tell me that he in general does not understand how natural language processing field works, and what natural language processing research entails.
So far the "guidance" I received from my supervisors over the past 5 semesters are:

the list of papers that he gave me to read while I was starting out in the PhD program
writing help with my publication drafts.

I would like to ask anyone who reads this posts if this is the right level of "guidance" that I am to expect as a PhD student, and whether I am entitled for more "guidance" than this from my supervisor. I personally feel that doing a research in natural languae processing / artificial intelligence all by myself in isolation is very risky and that I am not receiving adaquate supervision from my supervisor, but I might be wrong in that. Maybe I am bad as a researcher, or maybe I am just not good enough to make any publications. So I am just very confused about my situation and myself.
Could my lack of performance as a researcher be due to the lack of supervision I am receiving? or is this level of superivison normal for PhD students?
Thank you,

I'm in mathematics, in the U.S.
For me, "advisors guide their students" means giving advice on reasonable projects, to say the least. And advice on what may work, or fail. And weekly feedback on what has happened so far.
Although I do encourage my students to think about whatever comes into their minds, "good (naive) ideas" is/are not the same thing as "good PhD project". So we (collectively) negotiate a middle ground.
I do understand that there are some models of "advisor" in which the "advisor" does essentially nothing, apart from eventually signing... I do not understand this. And I do not believe anyone who claims that PhD students are somehow supposed to do something, unaided, which more serious people have cared enough to try to understand/resolve, but have failed.


Citation or inclusion of name in conference paper I am part of a team working on the second phase of a project. The project hasn't been published in any journals or conferences yet, mainly because not a lot of work has been done completely. Practical work of a certain significant part has been done by a previous team. My team started two months ago and we have enough exposure to write a conference paper proposing the design and the theoretical work completely.

My project guide asked us to start writing a publish-ready paper encompassing everything, including the previous years practical work. He says, cite their term project and use their data. He was the guide of their term project too. I'm unsure as to whether it's right to just cite their unpublished thesis work. I think maybe they should be co-authors too since their work does comprise a significant part in the paper.

Am I right and should I bring it up to the professor? If so, how should I do it without offending him? If the question is vague, I could give more specifics.

EDIT: The field is control and robotics. The practical work is calibration of the equipment in question. The overall paper does include control strategy, dynamics and other sections that the previous researchers have not touched upon.

That's a delicate question. My own rule is to offer a co-authorship to anybody with whom I discussed the problem unless I use only the results they have already published and took the official credit for. However I don't insist and if they decline, I just give them extended thanks in the paper. So, I would definitely contact the (leader of) the previous team and offer to include all the names in the author line.

As to ow to approach your professor, it is not entirely unlikely that he is reading this very thread at the same time as you already, so once you decided to go public with it, just show him the replies you get here and ask what he thinks and what his arguments are. If he is a good man, he'll be straight with you and hold no grudges. If not, well, then you are in trouble already...


How to determine similarity score of new manuscript against own yet-to-publish manuscripts? Considering the ethical and professional implications of self plagiarism, it is very useful to check new manuscript against old ones (which are under review and not yet published) to decrease self plagiarism. In a white paper by ithenticate (download from http://www.ithenticate.com/self-plagiarism-free-white-paper), one way to avoid self plagiarism is to significantly paraphrase those text which are need to be used in new article. However, I have difficulties in identifying the similarity percentage of my current work against yet-unpublished works. Online tools (that I know) check the manuscript against published works. I have 3 journal papers, 1 is published, 1 is under review, and 1 is under preparation. Now, I need to check the third one to see the similarity score. Any suggestion?

First suggestion: Never copy-paste material from earlier works, always write everything from scratch.

This prevents you from moving critical passages from one paper to the other. It is of course still possible to end up with a similar or even identical sentence by accident, particularly if you describe a method or something similar. If you end up using the same method for several papers it is also possible to simply reference your original description in subsequent papers. The Ithenticate white paper mentioned by you provides good advice. Yuo can slso visit the COPE (Committee On Publication Ethics) web site and search for self-plagiarism.

Second suggestion: Use the softwares such as iThenticate,  turnitin or the like depending what you are looking for. But, I would not blindly just look at percentages of overlap but focus on where the overlaps occur. If it is in the methods section describing a series of steps ina  process it is clearly not as critical as if it is in the discussion or conclusions. If you find overlap and you can identify what it is, then go to my first suggestion and critically review if you need to say it again.