Why do papers published by people in tech industry often have such a large number of authors? It is no secret that industry labs are competing with academia at a pace never seen before. Most of the tech conferences now are dominated by industries with superior funding, human resources, and data.

What surprises me is that papers from industry are often written by a large number of authors. In fact, whenever I see a citation/reference with a whole string of authors, I can immediately predict that it comes from industry labs. Why is this the case?

For example, this very short and simple looking paper from Google is authored by 9 people.

Here is another very brief paper from Google, similar to the style of an undergraduate project. Now why is 12 people needed to put it together?

Take a look at another paper from Facebook. What looks to me to be a  survey paper with no simulation or any equation required 17 authors.

Or this, again, very short joint paper from Apple, Facebook, Google. Why 11 authors?

Why does this Google paper (that has three labeled equations in total) require 16 authors? Are these people gaming the publication/citation count system or what.

Why does this other Google paper require 31 authors? Am I to believe that they all contributed equally?

Can someone please chime in as to why these papers require so many authors? I say many because I've seen student projects or theses written by a single person that (more than) rivals the depth of those papers that require some 15 people to write.

TL;DR: results in industrial practice are often much more of a product of team work, rather than the "every student works on their own thesis" model that we usually have in academia. This is also reflected in the length of author lists.

The work mode of an industry lab (or, even worse, of a group of day-to-dat software engineers in industry who just happened to become involved with a paper) is typically different to your average academic lab. To wit:
Academic project (simplified, of course):
Somebody (a PI, the student themselves, or somebody in between) has an idea for a research paper. A person (often, but not necessarily, a student) takes responsibility for executing it, and collaborates with their advisor and, maybe, one or two other students on executing it. Importantly, for this "driver" of the project it is usually of high importance (because it goes into their thesis in the case of a student), and they invest a significant portion of their time on it. The other collaborators usually only invest time in specific roles (giving feedback, doing specific analyses, helping with paper writing, etc.). In short, there is often one person responsible for bringing the project all the way.
Industrial project (particularly in the case when a software company is reporting on aspects of their practice, as in many of your examples):
Somebody (often a member of the research division of the company, sometimes an academia-affine practitioner) has an idea for a paper. They start working on it, but they cannot commit more than a fraction of their time on it (because even for industrial researchers, writing papers is often much less a core focus of their job profile than for students or academic staff), so they gather collaborators, who likewise cannot put more than a few hours here and there on the project. Additionally, for such "report of a practice" kind of papers, many people have typically contributed to establishing the practice, and it is bad tone to leave out key players (unless they don't want to contribute to the paper). In short, while there may be a coordinating person as well, nobody really has the time to work on this paper full-time, and many people have somehow contributed to the work being reported on, so automatically the author list swells.


Does doing poorly in a course hurt my chances of getting into grad school? I'm a chemistry major and I've developed a strong interest in some areas of physical chemistry (and physics) and I do really well in physics and math courses. However, organic chemistry has really hit my GPA pretty hard.

This is due mostly to the fact that I'm having a tough time with the subject material and recent illness. Aside from being sick, I've been doing well in my other classes (so the blame is really shifted more toward the I'm-not-"getting"-organic) aside from receiving a handful of W's which I know will also hurt.

Since Organic chemistry is definitely a course within my major, I'm worried that it will significantly damage my chances of getting into grad school. I got a C- in the first semester of Organic and an F in the second semester.

I retook Organic I and got a B. I'm retaking Organic II and I'm doing much better, but the initial try will still appear on my transcript.

If I want to pursue physical chemistry, how awful are my organic grades and my Ws going to look to admissions?

(Note: My GPA was pretty awesome before Organic and I'm doing well in my other classes.)

I would graduate with roughly a 3.6 GPA. Other than Organic, I fare well in my courses. I have done undergraduate research and have presented several times and will likely have a paper before I graduate.

Edit: In the time since I've written this, I retook both Organic I and II and attained a B in both classes.

I am a tenured associate professor in the mathematics (note: not chemistry) at UGA and did graduate admissions for several years there.

I am a little surprised that the two answers so far have avoided the obvious: getting a C- grade in two required courses in your major certainly has a negative effect on your chances of getting into graduate school.  The only question is how much.  I don't want to speculate on this because you deserve answers from my opposite number in a chemistry department, and I hope you'll get one.  I'll just say: if we "transposed" this question into mathematics, getting C- grades in two core courses that are well known to be difficult enough to knock some students out of the major (say, real analysis): that would indeed be a serious flaw.  We can admit students who got good grades in all the key courses, and we usually do.

However, I don't think you have asked exactly the right question.  The issue is not whether you should abandon your graduate school plans based upon your performance in one (or two) courses.  You shouldn't.  But trying to precisely quantify the damage is our job, not yours.  Your job is to avoid if possible, and if not possible remedy, the problem.

For a very serious student (students who want to go to grad school should count as "very serious"!), getting a C- in a course and then moving on to take the continuation course with the expectation of more of the same is a tactical error.  You say you plan to retake the courses anyway.  Then why are you even taking the second course now?!?  You need to plan more precisely for your own success.  I would look into withdrawing from the second semester course if it's at all possible.

You also mention health problems.  They can certainly affect your academic and professional performance, and this can happen in an uneven way.  It is quite plausible that you're doing as well in the other courses that you have more talent / experience with / predilection for as you would have done if you were healthy and doing much worse in the course that needs more of your time and energy.  Really consider taking time off, or adding a semester or a year, or doing whatever you can to lighten your load and give yourself the chance to do well.  It is much easier to get official accommodations for serious problems while they're occurring than to try to explain two years later the dip in your transcript.

In general I think you could get better advice on which courses to take when and how to succeed in your major.  A lot of the most successful students are successful not because of superior talent but because they've been properly mentored or set up for success by others, or because they instinctively know much better than others how to set themselves up for success (which, contrary to what I said above, is certainly a talent).

Good luck.


Is it a bad idea to point out flaws/weaknesses of your model in your paper? In a modeling paper I am writing, I know that there are some limitations.

Is it a bad idea to point out the limitations? Am I just giving the reviewers more straw for them to reject my paper?

Science is not about getting papers published; it's about writing papers that move a field forward. So don't let worries about reviewers prevent you from adding content that you feel should be there. Indeed, modeling papers that hide their limitations are much less effective at advancing a field than those that clearly explain them.

Good reviewers recognize this and often look in the Discussion for a clear exposition of the model's limitations as well as its strengths. That said, to be worth anything a model must make useful contributions despite these limitations, and it's your job to explain how your model does that.


Recreating images from a source In the field I work in, it is customary to use a graphical representation of some mathematical concepts. For my thesis, I have been creating a batch of figures containing these representations. These figures are very similar to those in one of my sources. I am wondering if I should cite that source in some way.

Some of my considerations:

The general form of the images is widely used in the field
I am making all figures myself, so no direct copying

According to SIAM:

  Note: Figures or tables created by someone other than the author or borrowed from a previously published source, even those created by the author him- or herself, must carry an appropriate credit line at the end of the caption. (See section 5.2.5 for additional information.)

Elsevier and IEEE have similar statements, which explicitly include the recreation of the figures.

If you have a source in mind already, it is probably safest just to cite it in the caption. However, if the form of the figure is indisputably widespread, then there is no need to cite it. I would generally follow the same fair use guidelines as does Wikipedia in such cases.

Examples I would not cite (because they are indisputably widespread):

Using circles and lines connecting them to represent a graph, G
A Hasse Diagram to represent all possible bit combinations
The format of a UML diagram (although I would refer to it as such)
A figure where I cannot identify an appropriate source with a reasonable amount of effort

Examples I would cite:

Any figures that I created for a previous paper ("adapted from [2]")
A figure from another paper that demonstrates a specific point, where demonstrating that same point is the reason for recreating the figure
A figure reporting data when I have not added to/modified the underlying data
Any time that I have a source in mind and I am unclear under which category it falls


Can I write two separate Resumes to apply for two different graduate programs in same university? I am applying to two graduate programs in the same University (Electrical Engineering and Financial Engineering).

One of the required documents is the latest resume.

In the past, when I applied for jobs, I would tailor my resume to fit the job description and skills they require, and include only relevant accomplishments.

Now that I am applying to two different programs in the same University, should I

Write two separate resumes to tailor to each program, i.e. one for Electrical, one for Finance
Write identical resumes, because two resumes may be compared.

And the application is 100% online, if that is relevant.

I don't think the resumes will be compared. Because all the applications along with its documents always go directly to the respective departments. Moreover, in any case the materials of your CV will never vary greatly. So you can make two different resumes for two different programs as they fit to the program.


How to prepare for long-term dissertation fieldwork? I am a PhD student in the social sciences at an American university. I have completed coursework, my prospectus, qualifying exams, and teaching. I am about to leave for one year of dissertation fieldwork.

As is the case for most PhD students in my position, the project is larger, longer, and more independent than anything I have done before -- conducting one year of full-time original research, writing a dissertation, and then writing a book. Although my prospectus outlines a research plan, it feels too abstract to give day-to-day, week-to-week guidance.

What strategies have you used to succeed in a large, long-term research project, especially when it is based on fieldwork and for a dissertation? Personal anecdotes, experience, advice, and tips are welcome.

The most relevant advice (about the research, not life in the field) I can give is to keep on top of the analysis as the data comes in, and do not stockpile data in the hope that you can make sense of it when you're home. Analysis will reveal gaps and problems, which you need to address before you go away. Though if you're stuck with a rigid methodology where everything has to be set up before you go and then you just grind through the questionnaire, then you have my sympathies.


Solo publication in a low-rank journal or co-authored with a famous professor in a high/medium-rank journal? Is it better to have a publication in a high/medium-rank journal co-authored with a very famous professor or would it be better to publish the same paper solo, in a lower-ranked journal?
I am asking this considering the fact that sometimes, writing a paper with an expert in the field opens doors to more opportunities in terms of higher-level journals. Of course it is not always the case, but assume for this question that it is. What would be the best thing to do?

Technically, this probably isn't an answer, but information that I hope will be valuable to you in your early career.
It isn't really a matter of either-or, here. But, you want to publish "good" papers in "appropriate" journals working with "helpful colleagues" when possible. What is "better" is better papers, actually.
Publishing low quality papers, in whatever journal, does you little good. The "fame" of a co-author might actually cloud your participation/contribution and might, when taken to the extreme, result in misconduct: i.e. "gift" authorship.
But collaboration is good. Not because it "puts points on the board" (which is IMO a foolish quest) but because it leads to better papers, deeper insight, and the faster advancement of a field. The collaboration can be, and usually is, among peers, though student/advisor collaborations are also common.
So, the advice is to write the best papers you can, collaborating as appropriate and as valuable, and submit to the best journals that you can. Think more about the fun of research and the advancement of the field and less about "winning" some imagined game.
Write a lot of good papers, singly or in collaboration, send them to good journals and your career has a good chance to succeed.


What software to cite in a manuscript, and how? When writing a manuscript for a scientific article, I often wonder what software I should cite or acknowledge, and how.

The first problem is to make a choice which software to cite. On the one hand, there is no way to cite all software, as this would mean to cite my whole software stack (Linux, GNU tools, emacs, git, ...). On the other hand, not citing any software is not fair, either. Furthermore, some software explicitly asks to be cited, some software doesn't. Also, some software is really crucial to the results, some isn't. Another important aspect is that citing software is not only about giving credit to the authors of the software, but also to give other scientists hints on what software they might want to use. So, the choice which software to cite is a problem.

The second problem is how to cite the software. Some (scientific) software does provide a classical scientific article that can be cited. However, in this case, no URL to the software is given. Others do not have an associated article. How do I cite these? I have seen people that cite the manual of a software, others just give the URL. What is the way to go?

Another aspect is where to cite the software. Some software can be cited in the course of the articles text, but when it comes to more fundamental software, other places may be more appropriate.

Are there any good ideas out there on any of these aspects?

After some thought on the matter, my own approach in my next manuscript will probably go like this:

Which: To choose which software to cite, I would try to answer the following questions:

Is there a scientific article that can be cited and are the authors of the software asking to be cited?
Was this specific software relevant to the results of the manuscript? If there are plenty of alternatives to the software and you use it merely because you knew it, this is probably not a reason to cite it. But if I used and profited from the specific features of a software, then it is probably worth citing it.
Do I explicitly want to give credits to the software? Maybe I found the software very good to use and I want to tell other scientists to use it, then I would cite it.

How: If there is a scientific article, I cite it in the classical way. However, I would also cite a URL of the software, as this makes it significantly easier for a reader to find the software. Otherwise, cite the URL. Citing the manual doesn't make sense to me, the only reason to do so would be to give explicit credits to an author.
Where: If I can cite a software in the course of the text, I do so, otherwise, I would make an appropriate paragraph in the Introduction or Acknowledgements.


What English expression resembles the German "Tutor"? In Germany, it is common for students to hold “Tutor” positions, which entail a weekly teaching class (e.g., 90 minutes) and the correction of exercise sheets handed in by students.

I would like to list such a position in my CV, which is in English.

What English expression should be used for this type of work? Is teaching assistant suitable?

Firstly, even in Germany there are different word for this. Besides Tutor there is also wissenschaftliche/studentische Hilfskraft, HiWi (short for Hilfswissenschaftler but has apparently different meanings in other contexts) or Übungsgrupperleiter, for example, and the usage of these words may even vary between different parts of the university and their usage among students/faculty/administration is not always consistent.

However, I think the most widely used term in English speaking countries is TA (teaching assistant).


Multiple journal submissions I was a junior researcher and I submitted a paper to journal A. After not having any response from journal A, I submitted my paper to journal B. After some months, journal A mailed me to say that my paper was accepted.

I immediately replied to journal A saying that I wanted to withdraw my paper. They reverted within minutes that they have already published and paid x money for publishing. I insisted that I wanted to withdraw and they mailed me to pay y amount of money for withdrawal, which I paid. Then they mailed me saying that my withdrawal is complete. I have not signed any copyright form with journal A.

After a few days journal B published my paper. Now after one year, I see my name in a retraction list citing that journal A has retracted my paper due to “author’s personal concerns.”

How this can affect my career? I withdrew my paper, so how can journal A publish it without a copyright form? On the same day that they mailed me to say that my paper had been accepted, I reverted and wanted to withdraw. Can they publish it and then retarct it? What could be the consequences on me?

Within minutes they replied that they have already published, requesting me to pay x money for the publication fee.

This sounds like Journal A was a predatory publication (i.e., a scam without real peer review), and not actually a reputed journal.  If this is indeed the case, then having a publication withdrawn from them may actually be better for your reputation than actually having published with them.

That said, you shouldn't submit to a second journal until you've already withdrawn from the first.  In the future, follow that procedure and also make sure that you're actually dealing with a reputed journal before you submit!


Can referees publish in the journals they are responsible in? Can the referees publish an article in the journal they review or the editorial board members publish an article in their journal? Is it ethical? Can you give examples for my question? Your answers are quite important for my research.

Your question is really two: reviewers and editorial board members.

Reviewers are peers reviewing other peers papers, or put differently and in very general terms, everyone reviews each other's manuscripts. Reviewers are not a professional occupation tied to a journal. This means that a reviewer is just as much welcome as an author as the author who was reviewed.

When it comes to editorial board members they are (of course with a few exceptions in a few, probably wealthy, journals) also scientists just like anyone submitting to the journal. They are as such not prohibited to submit manuscripts to the journal in which they serve. It is of course important that the editor's manuscript is edited by someone else. Even this may seem poor to many but if one takes an opposite stance and view it from the journal's side, having editors sneaking in papers at will will not reflect well on the journal so for no other reason, self preservation keeps most from doing so.

As an editor for a journal I would be very hesitant to submit to "my" journal but at the same time, if the field is narrow and possible publications venues are few then the choices may not be overwhelming and publishing in the "own" journal may be the only possibility. It is not fair to think of editors as pariah and person's who should be banned from communicating their science. It is just important that they can and that it is done in such a way that they receive the same treatment as any other submitting author.


Structure of a paper: Development of a simulation approach So far, I puplished a paper (literature review) using the "classical" structure: Introduction-Method-Results-Discussion-Conclusion.

At the moment I am writing another paper which presents the result of our developments of a simulation approach. The paper should contain the following parts:

Literature study
Description of the mathematical theory behind some methods
How we implemented (2) into the actual modeling language
Use cases

My question: How would you structure (+ name) the sections? My first idea was:

Introduction (including lit-review)?
Method (does the description of the mathematical theory belong to that section?)?
Implementation?
Results?
Conclusion?

Two more specific questions:

In which section would you place the description of the tool (f.i. a certain Matlab package)? In the "Introduction/lit-rev" section? Or in the "Implementation" section?
It is necessary to compare two fundamental modelling approaches (in order to motivate why we use one of them): Where would you place this section? In the section method, or lit-rev?

Thank you very much for your help!

It depends on your target audience, but my inclination would be to say that unless you're specifically targeting an audience that would be interested in the detailed implementation (say, computer science), the means by which you implemented the theoretical model may not be sufficiently interesting to include in the main text.  With that in mind, I'd recommend the following structure:

Introduction
Methods

Theoretical Model

Reference to the appendix for implementation details

Use Cases

Results of use cases

Confirmation of model validity with use cases
Novel findings produced by the model

Conclusions
Appendix (or supplemental material, depending on the journal's requirements)

Details of implementation
Public location where source code will be available following publication

This structure comes with the caveat that I work in a field where models are valued for their ability to generate new findings, and are of lesser interest when they don't advance the state of knowledge within the field.  If your field is more interested in the implementation details you may want to go with your original layout and place the implementation description within the main text.

As for the other questions, I would describe the model in detail in the methods section, and compare the modelling approaches broadly in the introduction (with the bare minimum amount of detail to justify your new approach), and specifically in the methods, with an emphasis on why your approach addresses a weakness of the previous approach.


Citation of the table or illustration made by myself I wanted to state the source of the illustration I made by myself. The illustration shows the structure of the company, which is based on my research and a number of other sources. What is the best way to state the source? Can I just write Author or is there a better alternative?

There are three options:

1) It is yours and you made it from scratch especially for this publication. You do not need to cite anything. If reviewers or the editor ask, mention that it is yours.

2) It is yours and you based it on some other illustration X that was published by someone else. Then mention that you based it on X and cite X.

3) It is yours and you published it before. If you are sure you are allowed to re-publish it by the original publisher then cite the original publication. If you are not 100% sure, consult the original publisher about their rules for re-publishing figures.


What is the point of a PhD thesis whose content already exists in published papers? In my area (computer science) it is standard to publish several papers during the course of your PhD and then only "write" your thesis in the last few months of graduate school --- often you only start compiling the thesis once you have secured a job for after graduation.

I realize that in other areas this is different --- your thesis is the primary output of your time in graduate school. However, in my area the primary output is the papers you have published and the thesis seems redundant.

Given that all the content of my PhD thesis already exists in published papers, what is the point of writing the thesis (other than to fulfill the university's requirements)? Why would someone (other than my committee) read my thesis?

I want to know what it is that I am trying to achieve when writing my thesis (as I am currently starting this process). Thus, an alternative question would be: How do I write a good/useful thesis, given that I have published all the results it will contain?

All of my papers have full versions on arxiv, which contain discussion of motivation, background, and related work, as well as all the details and some side results. (Unlike, say, mathematics papers, which tend to be very terse.) So in terms of exposition, I am not sure what would be added in my thesis.

Like @ff524 (comment above), I too have found PhD theses useful, and over the years I've collected quite a few of them. I've actually purchased at least 20 since 1992 from UMI/ProQuest. Unfortunately, I don't have access to their digital archive, but I have also photocopied more than double this number from various libraries during this same period. I have often found  them to contain fuller explanations and motivation, more historical details, and numerous minor tangential results, all of which tend to get edited out in the typical concisely written published papers (I'm in mathematics).

To answer your question, perhaps what you can do is to write an overview of your results and how they fit into the larger scheme of similar results on your topic that others have done. Even if no one else reads this, it can help by giving a useful summary of your work that you can siphon off when you need to give talks about your work (such as in job interviews) or when you need to write introductions or abstracts for future papers based on the work. Also, if for some reason you find yourself not working on this topic for a few years and thereby forgetting some of the details, and you want to return to the topic, your summary and overview will be very helpful in remembering what it was all about.


Leaving PhD program with a masters (for a job). Can continue PhD later? Suppose a couple of years into a PhD program one gets a job offer he/she is quite happy with and decides to take it. This could be for one or several reasons such as:

You are at a point in your life where you need some money and its financially more secure to work rather than being a graduate student.
It's a good idea to experience what the work force/industry/"real world" is like for a bit.
You may not be satisfied with your research topic/advisor at your PhD institute.

Assume also that during this couple of years one has acquired enough credits to get a masters before leaving.

My question is after working a couple of years, how would it be viewed by graduate committees if I decide to reapply for PhD programs in case I decide I really want to finish the PhD now that I am financially at a better place and have a good first hand experience of what its like being at both sides of academia.

Through the computer science point of view, all three reasons you've listed above tells me that you are better off in the industry.

  You are at a point in your life where you need some money and its
  financially more secure to work rather than being a graduate student.

Indeed. But the point of doing research as a grad student is having less money for more time. Even though most of the PhD comics disagree with me, I find conducting research at a good university gives you a lot of time to spend for yourself.
You will have the deadlines, not the working hours. Thus, either working at your office, or at home in the night, is completely up to you.

Also, not to disagree every single thing, but you have way more financial security as a researcher compared to the industry. Unless you behave very unethical, it is an extreme case that a university cuts out your funds.

  It's a good idea to experience what the work force/industry/"real
  world" is like for a bit.

This reason speaks for itself. If you're thinking the industry is the real world and conducting research is imaginary(?) world, then your choice must be very clear by now.

  You may not be satisfied with your research topic/advisor at your PhD
  institute.

The solution to this is simply changing your research topic and advisor. This is another point in academia, that you have all the freedom in the world to work whatever you want. Opposed to industry, where usually your boss tells you what to do and what not to do.

As I've discussed this topic earlier, I believe having a PhD degree cannot be measured by how much extra money you've missed, or is it really worth it.


Should I ask colleagues of my mentor for internship opportunity? I have a mentor from an industrial research lab. I use the tool he has developed in my PhD research, and we have been working together for several months. We have some results that he likes very much, since my work is a new application of his tool. However, unfortunately our paper has been rejected two times.

About a month ago, I saw an ads of internship positions at his group, so I asked him about the position. He hadn't replied anything until some days ago, he replied that this year he is busy organizing a (top-tier) conference, so he was reluctant to get students.

The ads is still there, and I still want to apply. Should I ask his colleagues if they are accepting students? More specific questions:

Should I ask my mentor which his colleagues are accepting students?
Should I ask my mentor's colleagues, there are 4 of them, without notifying him?
If I contact my mentor's colleagues, should I mention his name.

My worries are about the reference that my mentor can give to me. My impression is that he likes my work, but since the paper is rejected two times, I don't know that if it is good. I also don't know if it is rude asking to work with others while working with him.

My mentor is an established researcher with great personality, he treats unknown students like me just like his friends or colleagues. I'm very happy working with him, and I don't want anything that may damage our collaboration.

I think it would be perfectly reasonable for you to a) ask your mentor which of his colleagues might be accepting students and b) mention his name when contacting his colleagues, AFTER you've first made sure he's ok with this plan.

I don't think you need to be worried about a conflict: he's opened the door by saying that he's too busy to take on students this summer. As to whether he'd give you a good reference, that's quite hard to say, which is why it's best to ask him. Paper rejection in and of itself doesn't mean he doesn't like your work.


Grant "pre-approval" issue Background:
I work in a public university as a staff member, and also a part-time lecturer, allowed to teach only 1 class (per Union).
Last year, I applied and received multiple grants/awards for my teaching position. I already completed the work and received payments. The grants did not require any approvals from department/dean.

Recent development: Now, our dean approached me with the following conversation:

“You need to send me info prior to your grant submission..
You are only a lecturer…
We hired you just to teach 1 course…
You have a limit for a course teaching… you have a limit (per Union)...
You need to consult with the dean and the department chair about any grant’s proposal and share your idea with us…
 I know that you are not required to submit for internal review to the dean, but since I knew nothing about it, I was in a dark, moving forward you must inform me about your plans… You need to work with a tenured faculty on grants…”

My question:
What do I suppose to do in this situation? I obviously do not believe dean’s well wishes, and would like to apply grants in the future without “dean’s blessings”. I also feel that the dean would go behind my back and ask for denial of my proposal. I do not wish to share my ideas for free.

It might help to understand where your Dean is coming from. I work for my university's research administration department, and I can understand his position. For context, we are an R1 university in the United States.

There are likely a few things going on:

Grants often create liabilities for universities. There may be cost-sharing requirements or other implicit costs which the university will be required to pay. Administrators need to keep a close eye on these requirements in order to keep the university functioning smoothly.
Grants create risks for universities. There are many legal and ethical rules surrounding grants. Although some of the risk is on you, much of the potential penalties are assumed by the university. For this reason, many (if not all) research universities have dedicated research administration departments and all grants are required to flow through those departments.
There are legal issues. In all of the grants I've seen, the grant goes from the granting agency to your employer. It is not a grant to you personally. You should be careful about accepting money on your own. Carefully re-read the grant terms to be sure that this is not the case here.
Not all the reasons are bad: universities often like to reward individuals and departments who do a great job of soliciting grant dollars. If they can't keep an eye on grants, how are they supposed to that?

Other answers have mentioned intellectual property. I'll only repeat what they have said: if you work for a university you should not assume that any intellectual work product is your own property. Make sure you understand what the rules are in your location.

Overall, I would treat this as an opportunity to develop in your profession. If soliciting grants is an important part of your career (current or future!) then it would help to understand how it works. It's not as simple as just applying for a grant - and for good reason!


How to handle repeated references in footnotes? I have to cite the same reference two times on each footnote on different pages. Suppose footnote note 1 on page 1 is the same reference as footnote 7 on page 4.
Should I provide different serial numbers for the footnote or the same?

Can I repeat the same reference twice with different footnote numbers, or should I us the same footnote number for identical references? I cannot write "ibid", as the footnotes are not in sequence.

Generally speaking, you should use whichever style sheet your publication venue asks you to use. Different styles have different ways to handle this.

As an example, the following are two common ways to deal with repeated references in footnotes:

Use "op. cit." to refer to the prior reference by the same author.
Use "supra X", "supra note X", to refer to a prior footnote, where X is the number of the footnote. This is relatively common in law. You can also provide different page numbers by using "supra note X, at Y" where Y is the page number.


When would it be appropriate to disagree (in a publication) with a paper you have proofread? I have been asked informally to proofread a paper by a colleague on topic X with an application on Y (constituting about 10% of the paper). After my comments (and those of others), the article was submitted. While it was in review, I looked at Y in more detail for my own work. My own research has led me to believe the conclusions on application Y are quite incorrect.

The paper is now accepted for publication and only typographical edits are accepted, so although I communicated my concerns to my colleague it cannot be included in his paper, even if he wanted to. Would it be wrong for me to prepare a paper on Y myself, disagreeing with my colleague's article (because I had foreknowledge about that article)? If yes, how long should I wait before considering sending something in myself? Naturally, I want to stay on good terms with my colleague.

The fact that you proofread the paper does not change anything: once the paper is published it is available to anyone who wants to criticize it.

The most appropriate course of action however is to try and correct the error in collaboration with your colleague: either by publishing an erratum or a new paper. Or maybe you will decide (after discussion with said colleague) not to correct the error, eg. because it is not important enough. Your colleague will probably not appreciate it if you publish a paper about him being wrong without discussing with him first: doing so is one sure way to destroy any friendship or future collaboration.

Secondly, simply pointing out that another paper is wrong is usually not enough to get a publication.


How to handle an interview out of my league Not sure how this happened but I will have a postdoc interview with someone prominent in many fields, prominent even at their already prominent university, and who publishes in top journals with astonishing frequency.

How should I handle this interview knowing (and I do know) that I do not have the best CV they've ever seen? I don't want to talk excessively about all my skills or be vague about the shortcomings of my work in the (frankly unlikely) case that they do hire me and are disappointed that I'm not a superstar. But I also don't think these people are particularly swayed by the argument that I am a quick learner, etc, etc. I also do have some reasonable circumstances why my CV isn't what it could be, but I don't think they want to hear about that either.

What sort of balance should I strike? Or am I overthinking it?

Be happy for the opportunity to meet with the PI who's invited you for an interview, and go to the interview with an open mind and attitude. Answer questions you receive honestly and without artifice. Show rather than tell your enthusiasm for what's going on.

What's important is what you can do in the lab, and how you go about doing it. You might have a unique capability or perspective to bring that you don't know about it. Maybe your references are better than you think they are (and by extension you're undervaluing your skills!).

And try to avoid the impostor syndrome trap.


Applying to Ph.D. as M.S. student but failing to complete M.S. after admission I'm currently studying for a qualifying exam required by my M.S. program to get the degree and have also applied to continue onto a Ph.D. elsewhere (all of this in the U.S). This situation got me curious about a weird edge case:

What is likely to happen if I get accepted to a Ph.D. program, but later find out I have failed my qual/will not receive the M.S. degree?

I realize that no answer to this will be universally applicable, but the reason I ask is because I already have a B.S (what most of my fellow applicants have) and they don't necessarily know that my M.S requires a qual in the first place (so admissions decisions were probably made taking into account my coursework, etc.). So, on the one hand, it seems like even supposing I didn't receive the M.S. I am still an applicant with the same credentials as my fellow applicants + two years of additional grad level coursework + 2 years of MS project + 2 years of Research on top of these other things. On the other hand they accepted me expecting another degree which I don't have.

I'm not too worried about this personally and intend to pass, but I was curious since it is a real possibility for me (most people get 2 or more chances at the quals, but since I am changing fields a bit I wanted to take certain classes to help in Ph.D. admissions during my first year and ended up with only one shot).

It would be nice if this got answered as generally as possible for future worriers, but if more specificity is needed I did a math undergrad/M.S. and applied to Comp. Sci. for PhD. Also, the M.S. was not done to bolster my record but instead just because I found funding and got more time to explore before jumping onto the PhD "treadmill" as some of my professors have described it (meaning, my undergrad would have made me a good math applicant with research experiences, 3.6+ GPA, strong letters, from a respected school, etc. should I have decided to apply straight out of it).

Anyhow sorry this got long, I was just trying to walk the line between keeping it general and making it unanswerable haha. (Also, as a little aside, I can retake it late in the summer but it'd be a pain travel/housing wise).

tl;dr
Accepted into PhD while in a MS elsewhere, but failed exam required for MS (all in USA). What happens?

I would say it depends on the offer/acceptance letter you receive. I know someone who was accepted to a PhD program while doing an MSc, but whose funding (scholarship) depended on him getting a certain final grade on his MSc. I can imagine situations where that is not the case, and where you are accepted to a PhD regardless of what happens with your studies before the PhD program begins.


Why some issues are not listed (skipped) in online list of journals? I want to know where I can find the articles published in "Journal für die reine und angewandte Mathematik" Volume 2013: Issues 675-682? These issues seem to be missing.

This looks like a bug in the publisher's website.  I would suggest contacting them directly to report it.  There seems to be a similar problem with the issues from 2012 and 2011, though not other years.

If you have a subscription to MathSciNet, you can see a list of all issues of the journal, including those, and click for a list of articles in those issues.  Unfortunately the DOI links for those papers seem to be broken as well (example), which also supports the hypothesis that this is a website bug, as DOIs are supposed to be permanently accessible.

If you're at a university, you might see if your library has those volumes on paper.  If not, and you need a specific paper, they may be able to get a scan from another university that does have it, via the interlibrary loan system.  Talk to your friendly university librarian; they'll know how to help.


What do legit journal/conference/review invitations look like? As everyone else here probably does, I receive a lot of unsolicited emails. I don't like it, but I've gotten used to it and can just ignore them with a friendly smile on my face, because at least those emails give some unfortunate person a job and an income.

However, today I got an email that at first seemed undesirable but at a second look appears to be legit (albeit irrelevant, so I wouldn't have missed anything), so I'm wondering if there's any rules or hints to go by to identify legit conference invitations or journal introductions?

On the one hand, this is probably going to be simply somewhat of a reverse of identifying undesirable emails (see below) but I guess I'm mostly looking for information on how legit entities advertise themselves. Do they:

actually send out unsolicited emails at all?
invite "unknown" researchers for high profile roles?
even care if they emails look legit?

I'm a geoscientist (sorry, we hit rocks with hammers and trample on vegetation, but I'm working to better myself), so I have been at conferences organized by AGU and EGU, so I do get emails from those two and they're legit, but for example AGU doesn't care about the third point at all, with their emails being a mess of HTML with embedded (and thus of course blocked) images and obfuscated links with over 100 chars of tracking stuff in them, so if I did not know they were legit, I'd long have added AGU to my list of undesirable publishers.

And the second point, well, like most early career scientists, I have a slight case of impostor syndrome, but I probably have some good stuff out there and apparently I'm a good speaker, so it's probably not impossible that someone saw me at another conference and thought "Yeah, I'd like to have that person as a speaker", but is that really how it works?

And just reversing my criteria for spam is probably also not a surefire way to identify them. Sure, a  poorly formatted email in poor English to "Dr. JC_CL, Coauthor and Coauthor, I hope this finds you well" from a Chinese company I have never heard of for a field not even related to what I'm doing can probably be disregarded. However, all of those errors could also happen in a legitimate case, as my name is somewhat complicated for people not speaking my language, most people don't speak perfect English (and I can't identify perfect English with 100% certainty) and I do work quite interdisciplinary.

The #1 criterion is: they come from someone whose name you recognize as a respected colleague in the field. Or, at least, a conference or a journal that you know already.

The #2 criterion is: they look like they are not written automatically. Compare

  Dear Arthur, I have seen your very interesting article on shiny rocks and I would like to invite you...

and

  Dear A.Uthor, I have seen your very interesting article Shiny rocks in South African Mines: a Case Study and I would like to invite you...

The second one seems auto-generated, since they copied over your name and title verbatim. The first one looks like someone went through the effort of paraphrasing the title into a real English sentence.

In my opinion also putting a lot of emphasis on proceedings, Scopus and ISI-indexed journals and impact factors is a red flag. This is something I would never mention if I were inviting a real person to a conference.


Is it bad to apply to multiple master/PhD programs in different universities? I have heard that it is impolite and improper to apply to a masters/PhD program and ask more than one professor at that university to be your supervisor. In other words, when you apply to a single program, you should have determine who you want your supervisor to be and apply upon the prospect that if that professor doesn't want you/need you, you will need to apply again at a later date with a different supervisor.

What about applying to different institutions at the same time however?

Would it be harmful in any way to apply to programs in different universities, either on the same country or internationally?

Actually it is good to do that. You want to maximize the chances that you get in to a program that will work for you. Applying one at a time means that it could literally take years to get accepted if your top choices don't accept you.

Don't waste people's time with superfluous applications, but definitely apply to places that you find attractive and that you think might find you a good candidate.

Whether you need to pick a supervisor as part of your application depends on both place and field. Do that if you must or if there are attractive opportunities, but keeping your options open might be a better choice if it is possible to do that.


Should I send a copy of a closed-access paper requested on academia.edu? What is an appropriate response to a request for a copy of a closed-access paper on academia.edu?

For the paper in question, I only provide a link (doi) to the publisher's site on my academia.edu profile, since uploading an actual paper would be illegal. Academia.edu allows other users to request such papers, which sends an auto-generated email to me informing me that someone would like a copy of my paper - if I reply, the copy would be sent to this person only.

Here are my options, the way I see them:

Do nothing (ignore/reject the request) - as much as I don't like publicly-funded research being hidden behind a paywall, people requesting the paper are all associated with universities that should be able to provide them with access to the journal that hosts it. On the other hand, many labs make copies of their published papers available on their sites, even if they are not open access, so this seems to indicate some other aspects of academic paper-sharing culture. Besides, all parties use a full name, and I don't want to come off as inaccessible or unresponsive.
Send the person a copy. I don't know if this would be the right thing to do, but then again I have no experience with such situations.

I'm strongly leaning towards the first option - ideally, I would provide the recipient with an explanation on how to access the paper legally and explain why I cannot provide him with a copy, but I don't know if the message would even make it across given the auto-generated nature of the inquiry.

As a side note, while looking for an answer to this question, I learned that academia.edu has brutal terms of service and am in the process of closing the account anyway, but in the meantime I'd still like to handle this situation.

I'd send the article.

I am not a lawyer. However, it's quite common for people to send me e-mail messages requesting reprints of my papers. The Academia.edu and ResearchGate websites have mechanisms to request a reprint of closed-access papers for similar reasons.

Now I think it depends a bit on the journal. The chemistry (ACS) journals that I tend to publish in, allow 50 reprints in the first year, and unlimited reprints after that point. So far, I haven't run into trouble with exceeding 50 requests for a paper in the first year. I'm happy to e-mail PDF reprints or handle them - in my case through ResearchGate.

Your mileage may vary (i.e., depending on the journal). Personally, if the journal expressly forbids sending such reprints, I'd find a different journal for my work.

In my opinion, blocking such infrequent requests for reprints impedes scholarly work.


Using a figure from a U.S. government publication I would like to use a figure from a U.S. government publication in a research paper that I will submit for publication in a journal.

In particular, I would like to use Figure IV-1 from JP 4-03.

From this post it seems like you have to get permission when reprinting figures, but my reading of Section 3.1.2 on this government website dealing with copyright seems to say that there is no copyright on the publication.

If this is the case, will a caption like the following:

Fig. 1  Notional overland fuel distribution, reprinted from Joint Publication 4-03,
        Joint Bulk Petroleum and Water Doctrine (U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff, 2016)

where I cite the publication and make it clear it is not my own image be sufficient?

Yes, this is sufficient.

By law, all US federal government publications are in the public domain, and can therefore be reused for any purpose, without permission, without violating anyone's copyright. Of course, you still need to credit the source of the image to avoid plagiarism, but that's exactly what you've proposed.


Falsely accused of cheating in college I finished up a final exam right before the holidays, it was 10 questions, fully mathematically explained questions, and just after the holidays, I got an email from my professor saying that I am being investigated for cheating and have a meeting with my professor next week.

Apparently the guy I'm being accused of cheating from is a guy that sat in the same row as I did and he had some questions that had NEARLY the exact same text. This guy was my friend, but that's because we entered the classroom and sat in the same row, I had absolutely no plans of cheating,

I don't have that kind of thick skin and would never pull that mess - especially in college. Apparently my friend and I had some similarities between questions that suggested that we cheated, whether it was a collaboration or whether one cheated from another.

The problem is that I have no clue if my friend looked at my paper or was trying to cheat from me but I can be sure that I was not cheating from his work. I was doing my own thing during the exam period. If I get the exact same test with the same questions, I would get about 90-95% of the same answers I did for that final exam if I remember my material still, which I hope I do because I actually studied my best for it.

Anyways, I'm just curious, what exactly should I do when confronted - should I just tell the professor everything I just wrote here - Like what was going on. I'm getting anxiety over the fact that I might fall in to deeper pit if I sound aggressive or say things that might turn against my favor. I am willing to retake the same test in front of the professor on the spot to prove to the professor that I will get more or less the same result. On top of that, the professor allowed everyone to bring in a double sided piece of paper with information about the course on it to help us (like a legal cheat-sheet) during the final exam, and my cheat sheet covered about 9/10 questions on the test. What fricking reason would I have to cheat off of someone else?!

On top of all that, I took 3 different courses last year that pretty much covered 90% of the math course I took this year, and a lot of people didn't take those courses in my field. I took a course that covered probability, another that covered linear algebra and another course that covered proofs, all of which combined to create 9 out of 10 questions from that test. I knew all my material going in. What should I say or do? I don't want to spook the professor in to contacting the dean because this is phase 1 in the scholastic offence book - to contact the student first before deciding anything else to make sure there is enough evidence to continue further. Should I just say everything I wrote here?

Unfairness and wrong accusations make the blood boil, not just yours. The more it is important that you cool down and stay polite and collected. Now accumulate evidence that supports your case.

The things you write here make a good start.

Bring the "legal cheat sheet" with you and explain that you wouldn't have to cheat in any case with everything that was on there.
document that you took extra courses which covered large parts of the material
offer to give a test (unlikely that they will take it up, but who knows)

The things would demonstrate that you have no incentive, and probably no need to cheat. Of course, you can say "hell" and "sh*t" and "fr*cking" and all these things, but what you need is proof which these pieces of evidence provide. Do you have other indications that support your statement?

What reasons do they have to assume that you copied from him? Is he usually better? Are you usually doing worse? Do you suspect he told them you copied? As Ran asks, did you help the other student? (because that can create a problem, too)


Preprint Best Practices in Computer Science I truly believe in the benefits of pre-print distribution, however I'm not sure how to exactly proceed. Here are some questions I have in mind:

When should I make them available? Before peer-review? After camera-ready?
Where should I publish them? ResearchGate keeps asking for my pre-prints, although most of the ones I read come from Arxiv. And there's always my personal website at the University.
How do I handle versioning, or how many versions should I keep? Would that disperse any potential citations?
What happens to the pre-print after the paper is published? Should the pre-print make a reference to the publication DOI?

I would specially like to know what's the "state of the practice" in Computer Science.

The best practices I've seen in sciences, including computer science, involve

making the pre-print available upon/slightly before submission of the manuscript to the journal/conference,
publish the pre-print on the repository where the manuscript fits in thematically, i.e. where you find most pre-prints you read/cite (like arXiv oder Zenodo), or use your institutional repository, and
update the pre-print with the post-print (the version after peer-review but without the journal/conference layout) if allowed by the journal/conference, so that you have one or two versions available.

You can check whether you're allowed to update you pre-print with the post-print in Sherpa/RoMEO, on the journal/conference webside or in the copyright transfer agreement you have to sign upon acceptance. There is also statet what other conditions apply, e.g. whether a link to the published version is necessary or you have to use a specific licence and so on.


CV and/or resume for PhD Student with industry experience? I spent 10+ years in industry before going back to grad school to pursue a PhD, and therefore I have extensive industry experience, as well as ongoing academic work.
Is there a good way to represent this on my CV? Does anyone know a good CV format or template that would allow me to show this?

I would say there are a couple ways to attack this. You could list academic experience as a separate section to industry experience, this would show that you consider them very separate.

You could also make a section titled " (Relevant) Experience" and list everything you have in chronological order. This would give the impression to whoever is reading it that you consider all of your experience relevant in the position that you are applying to.

In either case, make sure you highlight the relevant portions of your background to the position you are applying.


Can I ask my adviser for a raise? Due to the recently passed tax bill by the United States Senate, graduate students will incur more taxes on their income which is already small. This will certainly affect my academic performance and research productivity. One of the professors in the department promised his students to compensate them by supplementary scholarships or awards. Can I ask my adviser to do the same thing to me?

First, it is not quite a law yet as it still needs to go through conference and be signed by the president. Regardless, you can ask for a raise, but arguing for a raise on the basis that your personal situation has changed is not really a good strategy. Most people ask for a raise when they can make a case that they have been performing well.

Many advisors do not have spare money floating around. Stipends can be set at the department or university level. As I said in this answer graduate student tution is an odd thing. Universities may either automatically increase stipends or decrease tution. It is really too soon to know. Your best bet is to probably unionize and make sure the university begins treating students responsibly.

The issue, at least as I see it, is that advisors need to justify to funders why a PhD student is needed as opposed to a permanent RA or post doc. When PhD students are cheaper than the other alternatives, it is easy. In my field, the NIH post doc rate is about $40,000 a year. This means there is only a little gap in costs between a PhD student, after covering tuition and fees, and a post doc.

The problem is not really the change in tax code, but rather in the fact that full time researchers are being charged tuition. This is something, at least in my opinion, that needs to be addressed on a university/department level and not with the individual advisor.


How long should I wait before following up after being wait-listed? One of the faculty members of the Ph.D. program I applied to called me on the phone and told me that I've been wait-listed. He said "You're high on the wait list" and he said it's very likely that I'll get in, but people probably will start declining offers in March.

He said he'll be in touch with me, but I haven't still heard back from him after 3 weeks.

At this point, that program is my top choice among those that I still have a chance for. Should I follow up with him? (even though I still haven't received any offer that would be a reason to ask them to let me know the decision sooner.)

He told me "Your profile is strong and you probably have or will receive excellent offers from other places, so we understand if you prefer to take them", which (besides adding to the pain of actually receiving no offers), makes me worried that they might guess that I have other offers and won't wait for them, if I don't contact them and express that I am still very interested in their program.

makes me worried that they might guess that I have other offers and won't wait for them, if I don't contact them and express that I am still very interested in their program.

I wouldn't worry about that.  The fact that he called you on the phone to me indicates that he really would like to make an offer to you, but he can't guarantee it now (hence the "so we understand if you prefer to take them").  Unless you told him something to indicate that you wouldn't be interested in an offer later, they will not pass over you as the move down the waitlist (of course, there's no guarantee they will move down the waitlist, but it sounds promising).

Since he said people will probably start declining offers in March, he probably won't have any updates on your application status until sometime in March, so it seems pointless to contact him before March, particularly if you do not have another offer you need to decide upon yet.  I understand being anxious, but take a deep breath, and try to be patient.  There's no need to contact him again until you have some decision to make (or if take another offer, so you can withdraw your application), certainly not before mid-late March.


No reviews after 7 months of paper submission I have submitted a paper to IEEE transactions on knowledge and data engineering (TKDE).
Until now, it has been 7 months and the status of my paper is still "Under Review".
It has stayed in the same status from the first day of the submission.
I have sent an email to the admin of the journal, and she replied to me that the paper was being processed. I have waited more than 1 month without any update.

Has anyone experienced the same situation? What should I do?
Many thanks.

Plenty of people have experienced the same situation. See e.g.

Submission review is taking too long

I submitted a paper five months ago. Should I wait a little bit more for a response?

Elsevier Review Speed

14 months waiting for first review time to go elsewhere?

In general: ask the editor pointed questions about what's happening to your paper. They might not be able to tell you when the reviews will be available, but they should be able to say things like "we've invited 4 reviewers of which 2 have declined". Ask them for that information, and perhaps when the review due dates are as well. With this information you can make educated guesses about how much longer it'll take to review your paper. If there's no sign at all that the article is being reviewed, then consider withdrawing and submitting your manuscript elsewhere.


What citation style is mainly used in political science? According to Wikipedia, the most pertinent styles are Chicago and APSA, which is a variant of Chicago. But I could not find stronger references about this.

EDIT. The purpose of my question is the following. I am trying to build a quick help-sheet for scholars and students about the "citation" topic. Political science seems to be a discipline not very careful about the citation styles issue (compared to the STM fields), so I can't find clear information about the practice of its community.

Political Scientist here. @aeismail is correct - different journals use different citation styles, as do different academic publishers. The best way around this is to use a reference manager (such as Mendeley or Papers) to not only manage your academic articles, but cite directly into your publications. These software packages are capable of formatting your citations in whichever style necessary.

With that said, my experience is that, generally, APSR's citation style is broadly accepted, with minor variation.


In Chinese academia, what is the significance of the corresponding author, beyond 'public relation'? I am a PhD candidate currently preparing a manuscript for journal submission in the environmental modelling and engineering field. One of my authors is from China, and contributed some data and ideas for the methodology that I found quite useful.

This person wants to be the corresponding author for the study with the argument that being the corresponding author is the only way to secure future funding for the study in China/from Chinese sources. Yet he is no way in a position to explain and defend the study, as he wasn't really involved in modelling, analysis and writing, and has limited understanding regarding the main model functioning.

I have so far refused to let him be the corresponding author, but he is really putting pressure on me to be the corresponding author.

Can someone give me some pointers on why it is so important for a Chinese academic to be the corresponding author? Does his argument about funding generally hold true?

I have been doing research in China for 10 years now, and hopefully I can answer your question. When a candidate is being considered for a faculty job here, only those papers where he/she was a first author or corresponding author are counted. This is because there is a rampant abuse of honorary authorships, namely colleagues and students are added even though their contribution was minimal or none at all. As usual, instead of cracking down on the abusers, more rules and regulations are put in place. This is why in most papers published from China, there are around three to four first co-authors (whom contributed equally) along with four to six corresponding authors. The consensus is currently being upped another level where some institutions are not counting corresponding authors.


Has the rate of papers uploaded to arXiv changed due to Covid-19? I'm wondering how much Covid-19 affected scientific productivity, if it affected productivity negatively at all (c.f. Newton actually did a lot of his most important work while the University of Cambridge was closed due to plague).

I'm using the rate at which papers are published on arXiv as a proxy for "scientific productivity", fully aware that it is not a perfect proxy and probably lags actual productivity by quite a bit. If country-specific statistics are available, e.g. "The number of publications by authors from Italy changed by __% on 9 March 2020, the date the lockdown started", that's even better.

I think it will be interesting to study this 5 years from now, but right now is way too soon.  At least in math, people don’t post papers at a steady, constant rate.  I personally post around 3 papers per year, and most of those represent work that is at least a year old (often much longer than that) by the time I get around to writing it up.  Given what I’ve got partially written right now, I suspect that I will post about the same number (or even a little more) this year, bit that’s just part of the ebb and flow of research.  What is harder to predict is the effect of all this chaos on the production of new math, which won’t be visible for several years.


Bored with PhD - should I tell my supervisor? I am in the fourth year of a part-time PhD. Lately I have found it very difficult to stay focused. I was really motivated at the start of this academic year, but my supervisor wanted me to do things in a slightly different way to how I was doing them: I wanted to collect field data from all over my territory sporadically - this would have made things fresh and interesting and I would have weaved things together at the end - whereas they wanted me to focus on one thing over a period of time.
Since I had this discussion with my supervisor things have fallen really flat. I have no motivation, I'm continually procrastinating and I keep making excuses at tutorials (a lot of which are true, but they haven't affected things quite to the extent that I have made out).
Should I be honest with my supervisor and tell them the way they suggested I do things doesn't work for me? Or should I just force myself to continue in the way they suggested? I often think that if I did things 'my way' I would have more success in collecting field data but if I do things 'their way' I just end up more bored. This is not to say my supervisor hasn't made good suggestions - she has in many cases - but this is not one that makes me more productive.
I am not thinking of quitting, but something in the methodology has to change.

I would think that framing it as "being bored" isn't going to be helpful, even if it is true. But you can certainly have a new conversation, suggesting that you think you would make more progress with a different strategy.
And burn-out is pretty common at your stage of things, so maybe it is that. I don't know whether telling the PI that you are starting to feel burned out and need something to refresh you would be helpful or not, but likely better than "bored". But it is a question of knowing the supervisor well enough to judge their likely reaction.
And be sure to telegraph that you aren't at the point of quitting.


How to supervise an undergraduate student if I am a PhD student coming from a different field? I have joined a new research group as a PhD student about one month before. Few days ago my supervisor told me I should supervise an undergraduate student for a research project. However, the things this research group doing are totally new to me. When I had discussions with the undergraduate, I sometimes find he knows more about me in the project. I find embarrassed, and don't know how to supervise him when I can't quite understand his project.

I know as a PhD student, learning new things is essential (and I enjoy a lots). However, I do not have the time now. The undergraduate needs to have some results in few weeks for some sorts of mid-term review report. I agree to supervise him because I don't want to reject my supervisor, I just join the group and it seems inappropriate to turn down.

What should I do in this situation? I don't know if it is common for a fresh PhD student to supervise undergraduates even you are coming from a different field. Of course, I am doing a lot of reading for this, trying to beef my background knowledge up.

The situation may be challenging, but you don't need to be uncomfortable with it. In academic research, it is not uncommon that the one doing the actual project is more familiar with the material than the one supervising it. While it's probably rarely the case in an undergraduate - PhD student relation, it almost becomes the norm in the PhD student - professor relation, at least as the PhD student becomes more senior. Keep in mind that supervising is not only about teaching the material, but also about how to act and conduct research professionally. I hope you feel more confident about the latter aspect!

In your specific situation, there seem to be two possible steps if you feel you need to do something about it.

Talk to the student you supervise, explain that your background is in a different field, and openly state that you may not be able to fully help on the content side of the project. If the student is sufficiently confident in working more independently, you should be able to be more relaxed as well.
Otherwise, you may need to talk to your supervisor again and explain the problem. Maybe he can point out an additional member of the group who would be able to help with the aspects you can't cover.


Acknowledgment of funding and adding an affiliation in exchange of permission to use experimental data? Since it is required to be precise and ask one question at a time, I had to split my problem into two. The first part (background) is mentioned here:

Gifting co-authorship if the topic of research was suggested by my boss?

The second part is here. So, I had finished 40% of a paper 1 as a postdoc in institute X. And, I had resigned from X on 31st of May. After completing the paper 1, I am planning to work and write paper 2 which will be an extension; probably a much advanced version of paper 1. I will start working on paper 2 from July/August and probably submit it in November if everything goes according to the plan. But for paper 2, I need experimental data and even though I had many options for sources to get the data, I thought it was better to seek permission from my boss at X before I use their data.

Also, note that the topic of research for paper 1 was was suggested by my former boss at X, please see the link I mentioned above.

But my boss at X has two conditions: First, I am required to have affiliation of his research unit for paper 2. Second, in the acknowledgement section, I will have to strictly mention that the research of paper 2 was funded by a project grant from his research unit.

In reality, he had the data from the year 2008, from a private seismic survey company XYZ and such data is very regular thing to obtain in any seismic survey. I have such data as well from my previous job profile as a geophysicist. I can easily get more of such data and permission to use them from other companies without any hassle.

As a result of this conflict my relationship with him has also got strained. I tried to clear things with him through a meeting, sent him two emails, but he did not replied. He has probably burnt the bridges and avoids confrontation. He may also be upset from me as I am going away from his clutches. He had even restricted me that I cannot contact the company XYZ directly for asking them for the permission to use the data.

Is this not a form of bullying?

Also he made it sound as if I was stealing their data, on the contrary, I was merely seeking permission to use them. I was kind of miffed with that, not acceptable to me.

I was thinking, that if I am allowed to use the data, I will acknowledge the company, my boss at X and his research unit. Also I would acknowledge him for suggesting me the topic of research for paper 1. Regarding the data permission, I have done this before as well in a different institute with another professor. It was never a problem. A simple acknowledgment sentence in the paper has been sufficient for such purposes.

So how fair are the demands of my boss at X?

From what you describe here, the requests for the paper are fair: nothing is asked but a proper description of what you did where, and who funded you and who provided the data that is analyzed.
The crucial point is that you say paper 2 is an advanced version/extension of paper 1 you plan to do using data you got at affiliation 1, which I read as  both papers are part of wrapping up your scientific output at affiliation 1.

(To me this sounds as if paper 1 is describing the theory and paper 2 describes the application to experimental data - if that's the case, you have two papers closely related to project 1.
Also, how closely related is your project at affiliation 2? The more different that is, the more related to affiliation 1 will paper 2 be seen.)

  I am required to have affiliation of his research unit for paper 2. Second, in the acknowledgement section, I will have to strictly mention that the research of paper 2 was funded by a project grant from his research unit.

At least in my field (not geophysics) it is perfectly normal to list an author who changed affiliations with 2 affiliations. From what you say, you'll anyways need to refer to paper with something like "this is an extension of [paper1]" in the introduction. In addition, you can clarify your affiliations in the acknowledgements saying that you started working on the project while at affiliation 1, funded by project 1, and now are at affiliation 2, funded by project 2. If you like, you coul dbe even more specific in describing what was done where.
If your project at affiliation 2 is unrelated, you may give affiliations as "1, now working at 2".

  In reality, he had the data from the year 2008, from a private seismic survey company XYZ and such data is very regular thing to obtain in any seismic survey.
  I have such data as well from my previous job profile as a geophysicist. I can easily get more of such data and permission to use them from other companies without any hassle.

Whether you could have used other data as well does not matter at all. The point is that you give the proper origin of the data you actually use.
And, regardless whether you use data you got at affiliation 1 or at job 0, you need permission by the respective employer to use that data for new studies or papers. (I'm talking German legislation, things may vary somewhere else, but I guess this is something you can safely extrapolate to other parts of the world).

The only thing you describe that sounds somewhat unusual to me is that prof. 1 asked you to no not contact company XYZ on your own. But we'd require background information by prof. 1 to judge whether this is fine or not.

I do have the impression from your posts, though, that you are still thoroughly stressed about your situation and still too upset to think calmly. One point that triggers this impression in your post is that you write in length about prof. 1 being upset - and are - judging from what your write -  thoroughly upset yourself, but never mention taking into account even the possibility that you are also upset.
Seeing this, prof. 1 very clearly spelling out the IMHO usual points in wrapping up publication plans after a change of affiliation may even just be a reaction to you being as upset as you are. (Which does not mean that prof. 1 is not upset, but we academia.sx readers of your question do not have the neceassary background information to judge who else but you is upset.)


Paper work came to halt - what can I do? Some time ago, I enrolled in a PhD programme and at the same time I started a full-time job. The full-time job became so time-consuming that progress on PhD related duties became really slow. As a result, I decided to terminate my PhD studies, however I would like to finish a paper that I have worked on.

Currently, the paper containts the estimations with results and the approx. fifth version of text, that makes sense to me. Unfortunately, my supervisor tells me that the text needs to undergo some changes in order to bring it closer to the "academic English".

As I do not intend to continue an academic carreer, I have no use for learning academic English beyond the scope of my Bachelor and Master theses. Hence, forgoing one or two month's evenings/weekends just to learn academic English well enough to publish is something I am unwilling to do.

What would you do in my position? Get someone else on the paper and give them co-authorship for editing the text into publishable form? Or something entirely else?

Any input is much appreciated,
Daniel

Why not ask your supervisor to give you examples of what editing he wants done and see if its something you can do on your own? If you've worked on the paper up to the 5th draft, it seems a shame to then allow someone else to take the credit for your own hard work. You can also read some good books on academic style of writing. Depending on your field, I can recommend this book. I'm sure there are many others.

So in summary, if I were in your shoes I would do it on my own. I'm sure good writing skills is something that's valued even in most jobs.


Given only one possible appointment for masters application interview with no possibility to renegotiate date: Is this a red flag or normal? Background:
I applied for several masters programs this season (taking into account the advice given on this site) and have received a request for a telephone/Skype interview with one of the German universities I applied for. The response came much more quickly than I expected and I still have no replies from other universities.

The mail contained suggested date and time (ten or so days from the date the mail was sent) and asked me to confirm it. Unfortunately, at the specified time, I'll be on a highway, in a different country, traveling between two cities. In my response, I explained that I'll be on a trip and that I'm coming back two days after the suggested date and that I'll be available pretty much at any time after I return from my trip. The reply I got is that the time suggested is the only available time for the interview.

Question:
My unfortunate situation aside, I wanted to ask is it normal for universities to be this inflexible when scheduling admissions interviews? Did I go out if line by attempting to negotiate the interview date? This is the first time I'm having any sort of interview, so I really have no idea what are the cultural norms in such case.

I think it was perfectly reasonable of you to ask to reschedule.  Of course, it's unfortunate that they weren't able or willing to accommodate you, but that's up to them.

You'll now have to decide what you want to do: interview while traveling, or alter your travel plans, or skip the interview altogether.  It might be worth considering whether an institution that seems so unwilling to accommodate prospective students is an institution that you'd want to attend at all!


In IEEE format, How to cite a website when no author name is given? Problem

I have to cite this webpage. However, no author name is given there.

What I have found?

This and this one have referred, when we do not find author name, the title moves to the first position of the reference entry. However, it is in the APA style. From this one, I understand that I should use organization / Company name regarding the website, when no author name is mentioned.

My Question

In IEEE format, Should I use organization name in citation of a webpage when no author name is given? Citation of this webpage in IEEE format is given below as an example:

RSPH Authority . "Instagram ranked worst for young people’s mental health." https://www.rsph.org.uk/about-us/news/instagram-ranked-worst-for-young-people-s-mental-health.html (Accessed Sept. 28, 2019)

In IEEE format, Should I use organization name in citation of a webpage when no author name is given?

Yes. It seems pretty reasonable that the organisation is the author of the content and holder of its copyright. This should apply to all citation styles and not just IEEE.

As an example, the Victoria University library has a how-to webpage explaining this:

  If a publication is published by an organisation, association or a corporation, and there are no personal authors' names listed on the page, then list that institution as an author (this use is known as listing a corporate author, as opposed to listing a personal author). The corporate author may also be provided as the publisher of a source if the publisher's information is not listed on the page.


Terminology & description: what are the steps after A Levels I'm a science student currently doing my A levels under EDEXCEL from Bangladesh. I've never really paid attention to or had any counseling about career paths and the steps necessary to finish my studies. I'm even completely clueless about the questions to ask here.

What i particularly want to know about the name and elaborate description about an engineering and Business administration career path. I have loosely heard about terms under graduate, post graduate, masters, Honors, BSc, MBA etc and I have no idea what they are.

If someone would give me an explanation about the whole system I'd be forever grateful. Thanks in advance to anyone for even directing me to a guideline to learn this things.

A word of warning before I start: while this answer gives the broad strokes, these names and definitions can fluctuate from country to country and field to field. Since we are on Academia SE, this answer is also biased towards reaching a career in academia. If you think you are more likely to want a job in industry, then higher degrees such as Masters or PhDs are often unnecessary.

A Levels

The highest qualification that can be gained during compulsory education in Britain. Students generally take 3 or 4 specialised subjects for 2 years, to prepare them for a job, apprenticeship or university. As you know, this qualification is also found elsewhere e.g. Bangladesh (similar to how IGCSEs are now used around the world).

Undergraduate

A term which refers to both a first degree and the person who is taking it, for example, "I did my undergraduate at University X" or "I am an undergraduate in physics". Often shortened to "undergrad" (in the UK).

Post-graduate

A term which refers to someone who has obtained their undergraduate degree i.e. they are post-graduation, and is now studying for a post-graduate degree, for example a Masters or PhD. Someone who has obtained their undergraduate degree but is not pursuing further study would be referred to as a graduate.

BSc/ BA

These are types of undergraduate degree (Bachelor of Science, Bachelor of Arts). These are normally obtained after three or more years of study in a university (aka college in the USA). The type of degree depends on your field of study, for instance, a History degree might be a BA, whereas a Biology degree would be a BSc.

MSc/ MSci/ MA/ MFA/ MBA

These are all types of Masters degrees, typically lasting one year or more and taken after an undergraduate degree. Sometimes these are completely coursework based and simply teach the student more specialised knowledge about a particular subfield; sometimes they are research based and designed to prepare the student for a career in research.

PhD

The highest academic qualification. People with this degree can use the title of "Doctor". Can last anywhere between 3 years (Europe) to 5+ years (USA). Generally there is little to no coursework and the degree is obtained by performing original research and by defending a thesis.

Honours degrees

This is a very loose term that can mean different things in different universities and countries. At my university, to graduate with Honours means that you didn't fail any courses during your degree.

Advice

I would highly recommend speaking to your teachers or any kind of career advisor at your school about what you should do once you have finished your A Levels. For a career in engineering, I think a BSc would be the minimum requirement (business administration I'm not so sure about).


Colleagues don't congratulate me or cheer me on when I do good work When colleagues that don't co-author with me and are in separate projects, writing different papers, I've noticed they don't congratulate me, when I give them exciting progress.  They're around for the gossip, and are always willing to listen to gossip or bad news.  But when I have exciting news to report, e.g. a new paper, they are silent.
I do try to cheer my colleagues on, but I realize I cannot force them to do the same.
How could I deal with this mentally?

You're right that many academics (and I suppose not only academics) somehow systematically fail to encourage their colleagues, and do not congratulate their successes.
Ideally, yes, at least "mentors" would do so, all the more in light of the general failure. But, in my experience, mentorship is not to be reliably expected. Sadly. Let's not bother to talk about certain tendencies to "keep people down"...
So your situation doesn't surprise me, and I wouldn't expect much change anytime soon. If you can find a situation where people give you positive feedback, cherish it. And, as I've been thinking about more and more, you might remind yourself to be sure to give other people positive feedback, when you are in a relatively senior position at least!


What should a faculty member outside of the US do to move to a top-tiered American university? I have three close friends who are ambitious and young junior lecturers at universities in Thailand, Indonesia and Singapore who are interested getting academic jobs in a top-tiered American university.

How might they go about achieving this? What can they do in the meantime to increase their chances, compared to academicians who are already based in the US?

Neither of them are American citizens, although one of them studied in the US and another in the UK. They all work in the humanities and social sciences. I know that entering the academic job market in the US can be expensive, with all the traveling. And my friends live more or less at the other end of the world.

As discussed here (Is it more difficult to score a Tenure Track position in the US when applying from outside?), getting a US tenure track position from e.g., Thailand might be tricky. JeffE pointed out that it is not necessarily impossible, however, your friends would likely need to be on the top of their fields in that case. Your friend from Singapore seems to be a different case, as the universities in Singapore (at least NTU and NUS) have an excellent reputation around here (something that can, unfortunately, not be said about universities in Thailand or Indonesia).

In any case, my tip is to try to get a postdoc position in the US first. Postdocs are often reasonably easy to get into (at least in CS, can't really say for social sciences), and can act as a step ladder of sorts to faculty positions. Anyway, your friends need to be aware that the academic job market is no piece of cake in the US. Hence, no matter what they do, they need to expect that getting a professorship at a top university may simply not work out, so they should have a fallback plan to account for this case.


What can be done to bridge the gap between amateur and professional mathematicians? I am an amateur mathematician. I have trained myself on math-related websites and other resources. However, the lack of technical knowledge, methods, and sociological culture usually shared by professional mathematicians has prevented me from going further and publishing rigorous and interesting results.

Many amateurs, often outside areas where universities are easy to reach, face the same hurdles. I know a lot of them are cranks but not all of them are: some have extremely good computational skills, an extremely original vision of maths and sometimes a lot of time on their hands.

What can be done to bridge this gap between amateurs and professionals? How can we give amateurs the codes and techniques needed to enrich the corpus of mathematical results with new, fresh and interesting contributions?

For example, could retired professions create a free resource that links universities and labs to amateurs? In this way, the retired professionals could act as "pre-referees," teaching the amateurs how to write a paper, and collaborating on the research itself? There could even be a magazine in which publications resulting from this are published.

First, I can't help but notice your complaints are extremely vague and the language is evasive. You don't like "sociological culture usually shared by professional mathematicians", but it's hard to guess what you mean by that, and what are specific "aforementioned issues" you have problems with. Put it into plain words, please.

However, I can give a general comment. Amateurs might indeed have brilliant ideas, and this is true for all branches of science from history and linguistics to maths and chemistry. Amateurs can write papers and submit it to journals/conferences as we at universities do.

The problem is usually in, as you say, "lack of technical knowledge and methods", which in practice means that these papers are often poorly written (I had to review some) and aren't ready to be published. Your idea of "bridging the gap" by effort of retired professionals is rather popular among amateurs: we might have brilliant ideas, and all we lack is just knowledge of some technicalities, so we just need someone to take care of them, so we can focus on the big things.

Unfortunately, working in science is a full-time job, and dealing with "technicalities" takes most time. I would go as far as saying that understanding the methods and being able to write a decent paper is as important as having bright mind full of cool ideas.

Potential "gap-bridgers" should 1) be good in several wide areas (while academics usually specialize in narrow fields); 2) devote a lot of free time to find grains of brilliance among 99% waste generated by amateurs; 3) do the hardest and least rewarding work by turning mere ideas into something publishable; 4) neglect own interests in favor of pursuing someone else's agenda.

Summing up, an amateur doesn't necessarily have to undergo a formal training and get a PhD. However, having good understanding of methodology and paper writing is vital. There are books devoted to this subject -- take your time and acquire the necessary knowledge rather than waiting for someone to do the job. If you still need help, try to collaborate with people having more experience and write a joint paper.


How do I get a citation dataset with full text articles in PDF format? I am doing research in text mining. For that I need a dataset which contain full text PDFs of research paper articles, and all articles should be related with each other in terms of citing. There are citation network datasets available which contain only metadata of papers, but with this I also want those full text articles in PDF format.

What should I do to get such dataset?

An alternative to arXiv mentioned in another response could be PubMed Central, specially if you are interested on text mining of papers in biomedical and life sciences research.


Which institution's logo to add to research poster when research was done at institution different to main affiliation as student? I am a student at the North Carolina School of Science and Mathematics, but did research over the summer at Duke with a mentor from Duke, as part of a program run by NCSSM. I am currently creating a poster to present my work, and I do not know which institution's logo it would be appropriate to include. When I am adding a logo to my poster, what am I acknowledging that the owner of the logo has provided? It seems to me that both institutions have provided me with support, so I do not know which one I should acknowledge. I suppose that I could add both, but I would rather save that space for content. What is the protocol for situations such as this one where two institutions have provided support to a project?

If both institutions have supported your project, you should acknowledge both in your poster.

To save space, you have a variety of options:

Make the logos smaller by scaling them.
If available, use a small, square version of the logo rather than a larger rectangular version.
Put the logos in a part of the poster that is underutilized. (For example, left-align the title and authors, and put the logos over to the right side next to the author list.)


How many editors should a journal have? I am contemplating creating a scientific journal. How many editors should I try to get on board?

Apart from the points made by Stephan Kolassa, I would enter the number of articles to be processed as a variable in the equation.

If you start a journal you probably are aiming for a certain number of articles to be put through review per year. Note that the number of articles processed can be substantially higher than finally published since not every submitted article becomes accepted. Rejections rates vary but 50% is not unheard of and higher rates are not uncommon.

So you have a certain number of articles to handle. I then assume that your editors are working for free outside their normal work hours. You have to consider how much work load you want to put on these persons. In the journal I "run" I have set a goal of 4-5 articles per year for each editor and have tried to adapt the editorship to that number. I am not saying 4-5 is a norm but you have to judge what is reasonable. You can ask potential editors what they can consider. Obviously they need to put some effort in so one paper per year is perhaps not optimal. The work load I consider concerns finding reviewers, getting the reviews back and recommending reject/revisions/accept (and completing additional rounds of reviews) to a Chief Editor for final decision (the latter decision process can be done in different ways and reflects "my" journal).

The scope of your journal also plays a role in that with a wide scope you may need editors with very differing specialities. You then have to balance the number of reviews for each sub-topic so that editors will handle the flow without overworking any one editor. With a narrow scope, all editors can probably handle all manuscripts and the problem is then "just" to distribute work fairly.

You can expect there to be difficulties achieving a balance from the start and assessing the likelihood of attracting papers and maybe how many, although largely a guessing game, will be important. This is where the answer becomes closely related to the question of how to start a journal because many considerations involved in making sure people publish affects the editorship of the journal.